100-200 Hand
 

Online 6-Handed game 100-200

My opponent in this hand I have far from a good read on. Of the 5 other players in the game I would say he is either the 2nd or 3rd best but there was only one solid regular in the game and two losing players(which is why I decided to make a rare appearance).

I am dealt 10 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] in the big blind.
UTG folds, Next Player RAISES, 3-folds to me and I call.

Flop ($450 in pot): K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]10 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

I CHECK, he BETS, I RAISE, he 3-BETS, I CAP.

My plan now is to bet the turn no matter what card comes and to fold to a raise if unimproved.

TURN ($1250 in pot): 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (K,10,5,8 2 hearts)

I bet, Opponent RAISES, I 3-BET


The rest of the hand and some results later, but I would love to get some discussion going on this hand to this point. I don't post hands up here often at all, but this one really got me thinking. I certainly have my own opinions and own concepts I want to discuss about this hand but I would love to hear some responses first so I dont bias the conversation.

what will he threebet here?
 

or were you very serious when you said "far from a read"

Re: what will he threebet here?
 

If you paused time ala "Small Wonder" and asked me in that 2-5 seconds between him 3-betting and me capping what range I would put him on I would have responsed something like this. I think he would 3-bet OFTEN like way more than 50 percent of the time with AJ,AQ,QJ and probably even Q9,J9?...I wasnt sure how we would play top pair, but I thought AK, KQ, KJ he was probably 40 percent likely to 3-bet and 60 percent likely to call the flop and raise the turn. K-10 or a set again I dont really know but i guess it could go either way between 3-betting or waiting for the turn, for some reason i was thinking (hoping maybe) that if he had a real strong like that he would often wait for turn. Any 10 I thought he would probably just call the flop...then on to hopeless hands that I crushed or down to 3 outs, not sure what he would do with all of these but I guess you have to factor in some moves sometimes, although as James pointed out in a thread yesterday usually that flop 3-bet is not an all-out bluff because noone ever lays down to it.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

Since you took the time to respond to my post I'll take the time to respond to yours! Well I actually wrote and deleted a few responses so maybe this hand is a little more interesting than I had originally thought.

Preflop is obvious.

The Flop is where it gets interesting. With so many players three-betting for free cards now(chooks and experts alike) I think the cap is an interesting information gathering tool. Mostly because I think he can muck JJ and QQ on the turn if he's a pretty good player and he might muck AT on the river.

But let's say he just calls the turn - I guess you need to have to same bet and fold to a raise plan for the river? Well, I guess it depends on the card. I have to drive my brother to a football game or I'd go into more detail as to which cards would make me take which strategy(and it also highly depends on how the turn card effects the dynamic of the hand - a Q or a J could make the river card more interesting).

But assuming the turn blanks I think a check-call is in order on the river if he just calls your turn bet(I think he's unlikely to call jacks or queens on the turn and fold them on the river, but it's unlikely he'll find a value bet, either).

As to how the hand played out, that 8 is absolutely perfect, I think you have misrepresented your hand well enough that he's thrown one last raise out there with AK or KQ or whatever and unless he was fastplaying you on the flop with a set you're golden with most river cards here, and I'd value bet just about any river(I think you can bet and fold to a raise if an Ace comes).
-James

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

you totally overplayed your hand in my opinion. i dont see the point in capping that flop or betting and planning to fold to a raise on the turn. in fact the turn play, after all those bets went in on the flop, is hideous because you would be getting correct implied odds to see the river by then.

youre better off treading lightly and trying to get to a showdown for as few bets as possible here.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

"in fact the turn play, after all those bets went in on the flop, is hideous because you would be getting correct implied odds to see the river by then."

If I definitely have all 5 outs and can get in the check-raise on the river then this is true, but how often will I have 5 outs after I cap the flop and then bet the turn and he still raises me. I would say not close to enough to really include any outs for implied odds, I really think the turn is a definite fold after all this action unimproved, you could easily be drawing dead 30-40 percent of the time.

"youre better off treading lightly and trying to get to a showdown for as few bets as possible here."

So you are saying check-call, check-call and what on the river unimproved?

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

I think you played it great considering its online and there's a 4 bet cap heads up. I like the whole thing.

[ QUOTE ]
But assuming the turn blanks I think a check-call is in order on the river if he just calls your turn bet(I think he's unlikely to call jacks or queens on the turn and fold them on the river, but it's unlikely he'll find a value bet, either).

[/ QUOTE ]

No offense but you really need to rethink your game if you don't think a reasonably decent high limit player will not value bet QQ or JJ if you check the river. Come on.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
So you are saying check-call, check-call and what on the river unimproved?


[/ QUOTE ]

Check-call.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
But assuming the turn blanks I think a check-call is in order on the river if he just calls your turn bet(I think he's unlikely to call jacks or queens on the turn and fold them on the river, but it's unlikely he'll find a value bet, either).


[/ QUOTE ]

Checkcalling sucks because QQ JJ would DEF. would call. If you are checking it's with intentions to checkraise which is super-[censored]-hot-move here.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

"If I definitely have all 5 outs and can get in the check-raise on the river then this is true, but how often will I have 5 outs after I cap the flop and then bet the turn and he still raises me. I would say not close to enough to really include any outs for implied odds, I really think the turn is a definite fold after all this action unimproved, you could easily be drawing dead 30-40 percent of the time."

he could have AK for instance. that would not be an unreasonable hand to raise the turn with even after you cap it on the flop. same for AA obviously. and maybe even KQ depending on what he thinks of you. or even less.

"So you are saying check-call, check-call and what on the river unimproved?"

call. or fold. or bet. i dont know. it's all player dependent. there are some players where it would make sense to just call the flop and then bet the turn. or check-call both and then bet the river. or check call the whole way. or checkraise the flop and then check call down. or or or.

but i dont like the route you took. too many chips going in the pot there on the flop w/ too mediocre a hand. if you dont trust the guy then let him hang himself dont try to pound him over the head w/ T 8 kicker. it's not worth putting in 2 bbs on the flop to find out youre drawing thin and then stop drawing.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

"it's not worth putting in 2 bbs on the flop to find out youre drawing thin and then stop drawing."

Well said, but then again it doesnt make sense. The flop check-raise is usually how I handle the flop in this situation. This is a better than average flop for me and with that flop and the action up until my initial flop check-raise I am ahead more often that not. The only real question after we agree that the flop check-raise could easily be correct is if I should cap the flop or not. So we arent talking about 2 big bets we are talking about one small bet, quite a difference. Usually I don't cap the flop there, I usually call and then play the rest of the hand passively, losing turn and river bets when I am beat and missing out on them when I am ahead and never ever ever having a chance to fold a winner. but this time I decided to cap and it kinda felt correct when I did it, it might not be correct...but it seems close and probably at the very least an inexpensive way to vary your play and image.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

Gabe do you really think check-call, check-call, check-call is how a tough as nails high limit expert hold em player who crushes the games would play this hand? It might be, but I am not so sure

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

"he could have AK for instance. that would not be an unreasonable hand to raise the turn with even after you cap it on the flop. same for AA obviously. and maybe even KQ depending on what he thinks of you. or even less."

Mike I said that there is probably a 30-40 percent chance that I am drawing dead...I think that is more than enough of a chance to make the turn call wrong after he raises me. The opposite of this is that there is a 60-70 percent chance that I am not drawing dead, so obviously I took into account all of those possible hands you just listed. You took up all that space but you didnt say anything new.

By the way there is a great chance that you are right and this line is definite chip spewing and not even close to correct, but I dont think you have come close to giving an actual good reason for it or a definte better line.

How about check-call and bet a turn blank? Problem with this is that I don't think I can fold the turn this time because I wont really know that I am behind

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

"You took up all that space but you didnt say anything new."

okay.

"How about check-call and bet a turn blank?"

sure. what i was saying was i think the way you played it may have been one of the worst ways to play it. youre overemphasising information and not thinking about the power of the check-call in these scenarios. at least some of the time.

"Problem with this is that I don't think I can fold the turn this time"

from the range of flop 3 bet hands you listed for your opponent i dont think you can fold at any point in this hand. hence gabe's reply.

ive played against some pretty tough higher limit players lately who use check-call as one of their strongest weapons. i guess there's not much more for me to add to that. online is out of my realm as it is. you guys would eat me alive at 100-200 online 6 handed.

oh there's one more thing: you said you may be 30-40% drawing dead if he raises you on the turn, but then you reraise him when you make tens up, when that 8 didnt really change the chance you were drawing dead. so if he 4 bets you on the turn are you folding? what you said about being raised on the turn vs. what you did on the turn when you hit your hand seem like a contradiction. the correct play would seem to be to call the turn and then bet the river (and call a raise), but not to let yourself get trapped for 5 bets on this hand. 4 bets seems okay, but 5 would suck. what say you?

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

"from the range of flop 3 bet hands you listed for your opponent i dont think you can fold at any point in this hand. hence gabe's reply."

The range of hands sharply narrows when I cap the flop and lead the turn and he still decides to raise me.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

"The range of hands sharply narrows when I cap the flop and lead the turn and he still decides to raise me."

well there you go then, i guess you played it perfectly.

seriously, i understood it all along, i understand the overplay for info thing. i use it against relatively weak predictable players pretty often and it's very reliable. against tricky aggros i just dont have the sac for it, theyre making a move too often, i just like to pay them off, but im willing to believe you may have found a better way on this hand. ill think about it. here ill post a hand i played the other day where i pussed out and paid off in a scenario where it seemed like i was beat. it's different but maybe you can give me some advice this time. it'll be above called KQ 200-400

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
what you said about being raised on the turn vs. what you did on the turn when you hit your hand seem like a contradiction.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necesarrily. If he wouldnt have improved on the turn, a fold to a raise would have been correct if (neglecting implied odds) there is a greater than 8% chance he's drawing dead. Well, let's say with implied odds this would be around 10-15% (I don't believe your implied odds are that big, but let's not focus on that). So, in this case he would be correct to fold if he didn't improve.

But now he DID improve. His opponent's raise still means a 10-15% chance he's behind. But a ~85% he's ahead. So that's a clear raise for value.

If Hiatus says that he's more likely as 40% drawing dead, this would obviously strengthen your point. But I was just trying to show that his move is not necessarily logically incorrect.

As for the overall hand, I like mike l's responses. You overplayed this one IMO.

Regards

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

"If Hiatus says that he's more likely as 40% drawing dead, this would obviously strengthen your point."

that's what hiatus said, it seemed a little high to me, but i was just going on that figure.

"As for the overall hand, I like mike l's responses. You overplayed this one IMO."

id be lying if i said i didnt pretty much feel like god after reading this. i think i get a little too wrapped up in posting on here.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

I think I could fold to a turn 4-bet because I would also have to face a river bet...I dont think I can win the pot every 6 or so times once he 4-bets so yes Mike I fold to a turn 4-bet. Wow, this line is pretty insane and razor thin all the way...but I am still not sure I don't like it. Again I rarely if ever play a hand in this way, but I went for it in this hand and it seemed ok.

THEN AGAIN, I thought of a new reason this morning why my line might suck. If I bet the turn and he just calls with the AK, then I am probably paying off the freaking river now which means I put in way too much money.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

Ikke could you possibly offer up a different line? I mean I certainly didnt post this hand to show off how good I play, I could have easily sucked but my main reason for thinking it might not suck is because every line I can think of in this hand seems like it sucks a little. Its a tough hand to master IMO.

SO, if anyone could offer up some suggested lines here I would love for the discussion to move that way.

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
my main reason for thinking it might not suck is because every line I can think of in this hand seems like it sucks a little. Its a tough hand to master IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that this is a tough hand to play, and yes, every play has it drawbacks.

This hand is typical for a lot of shorthanded situations, and it's in these kind of hands where metagame considerations become important.

You said in a different post:
[ QUOTE ]
The flop check-raise is usually how I handle the flop in this situation. This is a better than average flop for me and with that flop and the action up until my initial flop check-raise I am ahead more often that not. The only real question after we agree that the flop check-raise could easily be correct...

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not so sure we can agree that a flop check-raise is easily correct. Your reasoning is IMO based on too few parameters. I agree that after he put in his first flop bet you're most likely ahead, but this doesn't necesarrily mean that you should be raising here.

Lot's of other parameters should dictate your action here, and that is why this hand is incredibly tough. For instance:
-Would a flop check-raise lead to significant information leakage?
-Would a flop check-raise gain you significant information?
-What hands are you calling the flop with?

These are only a few, and ofcourse you should consider your opponent tendencies.

So, let me first say that I don't think your flop check-raise is necesarrily wrong. It just isn't necesarrily right.

My problem with your overall tactic in this hand is that you invest a lot in information gain, which, from my experience is not so reliable as you might think it is. I believe folding to a turn check-raise could potentially be dangerous. I also think you give your opponent more information with your raises than his raises give you.

How would you for instance play a hand like A9 on this flop?

I think the answer to this question is important to which line you should take on this flop.

[ QUOTE ]
Ikke could you possibly offer up a different line?

[/ QUOTE ]

Since I'm also often check-calling on this flop, I'm doing that with these kind of hands as well. But I would certainly check-raise a percentage of the times as well. After he 3-bets you, you IMO gain not much by capping. If he is bluffing, he's likely to continue to do so, so nothing is lost by not taking initiative. But your cap does hurt you if he holds a stronger hand.

As mike said: Check-calling can be a very powerful weapon. It often gives the least information away (which is often benefical to the player out of position). Also, and that would be an important consideration for me, playing these pairs every now and then passively might prevent you from being thin-value bet on the river.

This hand really is an example of the complexity of shorthanded play. Lot's of parameters are to be considered here. And I think I only touched upon a few.

Regards

Re: 100-200 Hand
 

I realized I haven't posted results on this hand yet.

So I 3-bet the turn with my turned middle two pair and he called, I bet a river blank and was called by AKo