Example of needed aggression

[Vehn]

I was asked a couple weeks ago about raising middle/2nd pairs on the turn in order to take free showdowns. Playing 15/30 on party last night I had a mildly interesting hand that may illustrate why you need to be aggressive while in position if you plan on showing down. Its folded to the button who raises, and I defend my big blind with T9 offsuit. The flop is K-4-4 rainbow. I love these kinds of flops in blind steal situations as its very hard for the stealer to continue on post flop without exactly a king. This particular player seems sane, so on a total bluff I checkraise him. Obviously I don't recommend doing this frequently, but I wasn't picking up much to work with and this was probably being noticed. The turn is a blank and I fire the 2nd barrel and hope he lets go, but he calls again. The river is a nine, I bet for value and am called. He flashes pocket eights. In his shoes you simply cannot let this happen. While the pot is small and you may be ahead, you just can't give cheap cards to 6-outers like this if you plan on showing down. He gave me this pot.

[Mike Gallo]

Vehn,

Did the loss of nicotine in your life make you forget to hit your return button /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

He gave me this pot

Perhaps you should go smoke that /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
"While the pot is small and you may be ahead, you just can't give cheap cards to 6-outers like this if you plan on showing down." - Vehn the Master (of his domain) /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Great quote Vehn,
Joe Tall

[Luke]

Vehn,

Great post and great insight. Thanks.

Luke

[Louie Landale]

Actually he makes MORE money by calling IF you will make the total bluff on the river: that would be the same EV if you called his turn raise with your "6 outs". Raising the turn is better if [1] the pot is bigger and you would be correct to call with your "6-outs" if you knew he only had 88s; but you will fold this hand and also AT, or [2] You will bluff the turn far too often but bluff the river a reasonable amount of the time; meaning he's got a no brainer call on the turn but will have to sweat it on the river.

He may have given you this small pot but you were about to give him one more bet.

- Louie

BTW, if he "cannot continue without exactly a K" then you shouldn't be betting a pair of 9s for value.

[Festus22]

Nice post.

Put yourself in opponents shoes. Do you reraise the flop or raise the turn (or both if you [Vehn] bet the turn)? I would think raising the turn would be best but do you (opponent) then fold to a 3-bet (Vehn's)?

Got that (Vehn)?

[Ulysses]

Exactly what I was going to say. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Everyone here should be paying lots of attention to Louie's posts.

[Mike]

I must be be missing something? You haven't been playing much. He has 88, you defend with T9 get lucky and he played wrong?

An admitted sane player raised preflop with his pair, you checkraise him on the flop. How is he to know his 88 is the best hand against a random BB hand? So he reraises, and perhaps you call, what has he gained if he is behind which looks likely?

He calls to the turn and river which seems reasonable to me with your aggression on the flop. I do not see him handing you the pot, unless of course you discount a checkraise from a player who has been quiet as not important because you hold a medium/small pair?

If you were in his shoes what would you have done differently against a player who hasn't been too active?

[Vehn]

Good post Louie. However here is the way I see it. First, if I "miss" on the river I basically am going to give up almost all the time. I bluffed twice, I don't think my 3rd bluff is going to be successful. He's probably going to call a river bet with a hand like AQ if he made it this far. Obviously I'm not going to call a turn raise either. So by just calling on the turn he is gifting me infinite odds to draw out on the river and he won't make any more money as I won't put in any more unless I spike a T or 9, thus "giving" me the pot.

Of course he can't know that though.

[DrSavage]

I like your opponent's play.

[bernie]

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
So by just calling on the turn he is gifting me infinite odds to draw out on the river

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you charged yourself 1 BB, so maybe he is giving you infinite odds, but you aren't. For a raise by your opponent to be correct on the turn, there has to be a chance you would fold a better hand than his (88).

[DrSavage]

[ QUOTE ]

No, you charged yourself 1 BB, so maybe he is giving you infinite odds, but you aren't. For a raise by your opponent to be correct on the turn, there has to be a chance you would fold a better hand than his (88).

[/ QUOTE ]
Or call with a worse hand, none of which are true.

[BugsBunny]

I would probably reraise the flop. If he caps I'd (probably) call and then check behind to the river, or fold to another bet (unless I spike another 8). If he just called the reraise I'd fold if he led the turn. If he checked the turn I'd check behind and call any river bet.

Most sane players would fold to the reraise if they didn't have anything and were attempting to bluff. Many might fold a pair smaller than K's in this situation as well - or at least check to a free showdown. The scare cards work both ways in a case like this. On a steal a K is very possible, as is something like A4.

[Dylan Wade]

[ QUOTE ]
How is he to know his 88 is the best hand against a random BB hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhm. If he thought that Vehn had no standards for defending the BB, and that the BB hand was a truely random hand, then he has a very easy value bet/raise/reraise. He has the best hand after the flop 87% of the time against a random hand. He has to scale up the aggression when he has that kind of advantage.

HU is mostly showdown poker. If you have absolutely nothing at all , you can fold, but for the most part HU, pre-flop and on the flop are merely setting us up to play the turn and river. Vehn's opponent was stupid not to three bet the flop. It prevents Vehn from firing another blank bullet at the turn.

[DrSavage]

Most importantly, what is this post doing in SS forum anyway?

[Ed Miller]

For a raise by your opponent to be correct on the turn, there has to be a chance you would fold a better hand than his (88).

Huh? I don't understand. Clearly 88 should raise the turn if he knows that Vehn has T9.

[Ed Miller]

BTW, if he "cannot continue without exactly a K" then you shouldn't be betting a pair of 9s for value.

This is true. But if he "cannot continue without exactly a king" then obviously Vehn shouldn't bluff the turn either. I agree with Vehn that K44 is a great flop for bluffing. I don't agree that his opponent has to have a king to continue... obviously most people would also continue with a pocket pair (as 88 did in this hand).

I think Vehn has a clear bet on the river because he is out of position. If he checks, 88 will check behind, but KT will bet. If he bets, both 88 and KT will call.

BTW, Vehn, a cheaper way to make this play is to check-call the flop and lead the turn. Rarely does someone actually fold to the flop checkraise. While check-call the flop, lead the turn looks fishy to me, most people don't think enough to pick that up. I've had success restealing from blind stealers doing that since Mason suggested the play to me three or four months ago.

EDIT: BTW, just to be clear, Louie is correct that just calling is better if Vehn is almost guaranteed to bluff the river. But if Vehn will bluff more like 40 or 50% of the time, then raising the turn is preferred. The pot is already 6 big bets... giving a cheap card to a six-outter costs 3/4 of a bet or so. If Vehn's opponent had QQ instead of 88, then just calling is much more attractive.

[Ed Miller]

I disagree. 88 missed a raise... probably on the turn.

[GuyOnTilt]

My thoughts exactly. Good post Louie.

GoT

[DrSavage]

[ QUOTE ]
Huh? I don't understand. Clearly 88 should raise the turn if he knows that Vehn has T9.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why?
Here's a situatation. Let's say i have QQ on button. Let's say you have AK UTG. I know you have AK because i picked up a tell on you which is: every time you have AK you say "I have AK". So you raise, i call, the rest folds. Flop is garbage. You bet, i call. Turn is garbage. You bet , I call. I still know you have AK. You will fold if I raise. But I can make more money if you will continue the bluff on the river enough times to outweight the situation where you draw out on me. The decision of calling or raising here is only a matter of evaluating your agressiveness.
Just a situation to illustrate why just calling when you think you have the best hand is more profitable. Same reasoning applies to Vehn's hand, but even more so as he doesn't know if Vehn has the best hand or not. Calling the turn is definitely a viable option as long as Vehn is capable of continuing the bluff on the river.

[Vehn]

[ QUOTE ]
The flop is K-4-4 rainbow. I love these kinds of flops in blind steal situations as its very hard for the stealer to continue on post flop without exactly a king.

[/ QUOTE ]

This really should have been "a king or a pocket pair" by the way but its really kinda implied. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly 88 should raise the turn if he knows that Vehn has T9.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he thought Vehn would call a raise with that hand. But if Vehn will call with hands that beat him and fold his bluffs, shouldn't he let Vehn keep bluffing? He can alway bet if Vehn checks the river.

What hands can he put Vehn on? I would say Kx, 4xs, and a smallish pair, or a total bluff. (Vehn would likely 3-bet preflop with a pair that beats 88) The only hands he beats are smallish pairs or bluffs, but Vehn will likely fold them to a raise on the turn. So if he raises he will only get hands he beats to fold.

Note it might be different if the pot was bigger and a hand like overcards was getting correct pot odds to call the raise. Then he might want to raise and try and get hands that are drawing live, but afraid the raiser has a King to fold. With a small pot like this calling is better, IMO.

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
by the way but its really kinda implied

[/ QUOTE ]

There is alot implied in your post and although Louie's post is right on; I understood what you said immediately. So, I'm not sure what the big deal is.

Maybe it's beacause I 3-bet this flop vs a check-raise or raise a blank on the turn w/88 heads up vs a thinking player. I also know you lay off the river unimproved, thus your, "value bet" statement.

I like the quote. I like the post.

Peace,
Joe Tall

[Saborion]

Is that what is most important? Might have something to do with Vehn trying to make us understand a bit more about proper play on the turn against one opponent?

I think this line says it pretty clearly "I had a mildly interesting hand that may illustrate why you need to be aggressive while in position if you plan on showing down.".

[bernie]

it isnt a clear raise. there's what, 4BB in the pot starting the turn and vehn is getting 4-1 on a 6.5-1 draw. if a raise will cause vehn to fold in this situation, why do it? he would be correct to fold (given his effective odds if he calculated the possibility before he bet the turn. figuring if he has to pay 2 bets on the turn) vehn's bet on the turn is in hopes of buying the pot right there. otherwise, he could check/call and be in the same spot.

if the hand was face-up and you knew for sure he had 2 overcards and he would fold for a raise, would you do it? vehn put in 3 BBs with a lesser hand, and he might put in a 4th on the end if he misses.

i agree with louie on this. i think the opponent played fine. vehn just happened to hit his hand then took the results to make it seem like the opponent played wrong. it's not like vehn wasnt being charged to draw. he was charging himself.

this is almost a standard HU situation for the opponent. especially if he's against a player who will bet like this.

i agree with vehn's play. but i also agree with the opponents.

b

[rigoletto]

You forget that you want to go to showdown and are not sure where you stand in the hand. It's hard to bet 88 on the river when our opponent has shown strenght on all streets, but the turn raise can earn you an extra BB when you're ahead of smaller pocket pairs and AQ/AJ and you don't really mind winning the pot right there since any overcards to your 8's doesn't exactly give you warm fuzzy feelings.

Louis' analysis is of course correct provided Vehn will bluff the river to often but it doesn't take into consideration the times Vehn will incorrectly call the turn raise with a worse hand. And there are also the (few) times where you fold 99 or K5 to be spoken for.

I guess my point is that when you're behind you almost allways pay 2 BB from turn through the river, but when you are ahead it's often easier to collect the 2 BB by raising.

My default here would be to call down the Lag's and raise solid and weak players.

[Mike]

You are right of course in the situation you describe, but if you read Vehn's post, he says he has been folding more than normal. Then he comes out firing in a small pot on a BB blind hand. I don't think it's unreasonable to put Vehn on a hand that can beat 88. Looking at it from the other side, you can say Vehn has been folding most hands so this must be junk too. Which situation would you weight more in making a decision?

[Mike]

Yup, it looks to me like Vehn was tilting here from frustration, ran a frustration bluff and got lucky.

[Lori]

Is that what is most important? Might have something to do with Vehn trying to make us understand a bit more about proper play on the turn against one opponent?


I don't think it can do harm to learn two things from one thread.

Lori

[Ed Miller]

You are slightly miscounting the pot. If you just call the turn bet, there are 6 bets in the pot. That means your raise will protect a 6 bet pot, not a 4 bet pot.

He has to be basically 100% sure Vehn will bluff the river to just call. If Vehn has only one overcard, then what you guys are saying becomes more correct.

In general, in a heads-up situation, if you think your opponent has two overcards to your pair, prefer that he fold. If he has only one, perfer an extra bet from him.

I don't see how this thread has gotten so much action. I think Vehn is correct from beginning to end.

[Ed Miller]

T9 has six outs.

When the overcard comes, 88 loses 7 bets (the six in the pot and the call on the river).

When the overcard doesn't come, 88 wins 1 bet (the bluff)

40 * 1 - 6 * 7 = -2

Calling is -EV. Raising is clearly better.

[Saborion]

huh?

[Ulysses]

But his opponent doesn't know Vehn has T9.

What if his opponent puts Vehn on:

25% smaller pocket pair (drawing to two outs)
25% random Ace-high (drawing to 3 or 6 outs, call it 4.5)
25% King (he's drawing to 2 outs)
15% two overcards (6 outs)
10% four (he's drawing to 2 outs)

and let's say if he's behind and misses he'll bluff 50% of the time.

Given all that, is raising or calling better?

Now, I just picked some random numbers and didn't even back-of-the-envelope the math. My point is simply that if he knows Vehn has two overcards, raising is better. But since he doesn't know that, it's not as clear-cut as you make it out to be.

[Ulysses]

BTW, in Vehn's opponents situation, I'm going to do something different. Sometimes I'll 3-bet the flop. Sometimes I'll call the flop and see what happens on the turn. If he fires again, I'll fold against opponents who I don't think would play this way w/out a King. Against others, I'll raise. I'm less concerned about the odds and how much is in the pot, blah blah blah. I'm more concerned about making sure that when it gets short and I have position, you're not going to be able to either push me around or value-bet me to death. Calling is definitely the least likely thing I'll do on the turn. So, I think Vehn's opponent should often raise the turn for meta-game reasons if he believes he'll have the best hand a "reasonable" amount of the time, if that makes sense.

[Ed Miller]

The argument in this sub-thread was just whether 88 should raise if he knows his opponent has T9. 88 should clearly raise if he knows his opponent has T9.

To get the full answer, you also have to worry about how often Vehn will fold two overcards to a turn raise.

[Vehn]

I will never fold AA to a turn raise. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[rigoletto]

LMAO /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
The argument in this sub-thread was just whether 88 should raise if he knows his opponent has T9.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh. Nevermind, then.

[Vehn]

Why is this thread still going?

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
40 * 1 - 6 * 7 = -2

Calling is -EV. Raising is clearly better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now it's my turn to say "Huh?".

Calling can't be -EV. That would be saying folding is better than calling. I think it's obvious that calling is better than folding, so it must be +EV.

I think what you are trying to say is you are risking a 5BB pot (you can't count money you put in at the time of the decisionor after) to win 1 extra bet.

So your calc would be (1 *(40/46)) - ( 5(6/46) = .86 -.65 = +.21BB. (I don't know if this shortcut is a valid way of calculating the difference in EV's between calling and raising. Of course your calculation is different than a normal EV calc so maybe 7 should be the pot size? ) If the pot was 7BB your calc would make raising better by ~ .05BB.

So Louie would be right, calling would be slightly better if you can always collect an extra bet on the river.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
When the overcard comes, 88 loses 7 bets (the six in the pot and the call on the river).

When the overcard doesn't come, 88 wins 1 bet (the bluff)


[/ QUOTE ]

so who gets the rest of the pot when the overcard doesnt come and the player bluffs? 88 wins more than just one bet here. he also gets the pot.

i think your saying not to risk the pot to gain 1 extra bet at this point in the hand. right?

although, i agree as you state later in this thread, knowing how often vehn would call a turn raise and/or bluff the river can make it much closer.

b

[bernie]

actually i was planning ahead for possible turn action. at the start of the turn, it's 4-1. vehn bets, it's 5-1 to the opp. which i think is better than check/calling for vehn.

if raised, it can be argued that vehn is now getting 7-1 on calling the raise. though his effective odds are blown a little for the betting round since he's now put in 2 bets to win 6.

i think the call or raise can go either way with other factors in play. but i also dont see anything wrong with trying to end the hand on the turn with the raise.

b

[Ed Miller]

so who gets the rest of the pot when the overcard doesnt come and the player bluffs? 88 wins more than just one bet here. he also gets the pot.

My math calculates the difference between raising and calling. It assumes that if 88 raises, he wins the pot 100% of the time. So the one bet is the one ADDITIONAL bet he wins compared to raising (and the seven bets he loses is the difference between winning the six bet pot and losing one bet on the river). The arithmetic is correct.

[bernie]

cool.

i was just clarifying the math, not disputing it.

b

[Louie Landale]

I like this post except for the 3rd paragraph. Betting "for value" as an underdog only applies if your hand is worth or almost worth a call if you check, and you figure the opponent will call with more hands than weak hands (or bluffs) that he'll bet. In this case you suggest he will only bet a pair of Ks for value on the river (a reasonable assumption) which means Hero's pair of 9s is NOT worth calling on the river. This makes checking-and-folder the better river choice.

- Louie

[Louie Landale]

If Hero is NOT going to bluff a missed T9 on the turn and is NOT going to call the turn raise then Yes, Villian with 88 is giving away 6/44ths of the pot by NOT raising the turn; and I do mean "giving away". If Hero IS going to call the raise but not going to bluff the river, Villian does even better by raising.

And I do mean "6/44ths of the pot"; not a technically correct but useless "infinite odds".

Its astounding to me how many people argue against betting or raising with the "best" hand. Even with a monster you should bet or raise around 70% of the time; and with a vulnerable best hand like 88 its almost 100% of the time; it really doesn't matter much if the opponents are going to respond "correctly" or not.

Making the mistake of NOT betting can only be justified if checking will CAUSE the opponent to make an even more aggregious mistake such as a hopeless bluff.

- Louie