JTs against a loose passive
 

Had only been playing with UTG for about 15 hands. His VPIP was something like 75, and PFR was around 17%. Other than that I had no reads.

Party Poker 0.50/1 Hold'em (9 handed)

Preflop: Hero is SB with T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
UTG calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP1 calls, <font color="#666666">4 folds</font>, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: (4 SB) K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, BB folds, UTG calls, MP1 folds.

Turn: (3 BB) K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG calls.

River: (5 BB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero?????</font>

Final Pot: 6 BB

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

Check the flop. Check/fold the river.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

i want to say check-fold the way the hand played out given this opponent, but I'm rusty.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

[ QUOTE ]
Check the flop. Check/fold the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

I disagree with the person who said check the flop. He has 8 outs to a straight and a backdoor flush draw (1.5 outs), plus 2 more outs for Jacks. I would give only partial credit to 10's, maybe 1 out... so ~12.5 outs is pretty good. I would raise for value here. Even a loose passive would raise with 3 K's, wouldn't they? I would put the loose passive on Ax, Qx, or Jx after the turn. After the river, I don't know if a loose passive would attempt a bluff bet if checked to, so I might check, call.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

* grunch *

I think the flop bet is reasonable. It may get value from a lone A or a weaker Tx looking to make a straight.

I am not sure how to play that turn without a good read. If he was LOOSE but aggressive or very bluff happy, I would check call as I would expect him to bet this with A high.

If he is really loose passive, I would be tempted to bet out to collect money when he has Ax. If we get raised, I think we should fold this getting 6-1. Although if he is passive enough that he will only bet a K or better in this spot, I would just check/fold, as I don't expect to be ahead often enough to warrant betting for value.

Edit: I check/fold the river as I think it is much less likely for him to call with A high there, I don't want to bet his hand for him, and I am not worried about being bluffed out.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

I think this one is pretty hard, so I have a question. Because hero has a lot of outs, he really wants to see both the turn and the river.

If he checks this high-card flop, somebody will probably bet. So he'll probably have to call one SB to see the turn. After hero's flop call, the flop bettor will probably bet the turn, and hero will have to call 1 BB, for a total of 1.5 BB to see the river.

So why not check the flop with the intent of raising if it's 1 bet back? It is likely that the bettor will call one bet back. Then check the turn, gambling that the flop bettor will also check for fear of being checkraised. If it works, you get to see the river for 1 BB. If the turn is a blank and the flop bettor bets again, you can be much more sure you're beat and fold.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

Free card plays are much harder to pull off out of position.

When you are in position your opponnent can check for two reasons:

1) he fears a raise by a better hand
2) he wants to check raise

When first to act (2) obviously isn't valid anymore, and (1) is less likely after you've showed weakness.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

grunch

The way you played it, I think we are almost forced to bet the river and fold to a RR. You have bet out every street so you are representing trip K's. If he has trip K's WK, he will most likely just call but won't fold anyway. If we check now it looks very bluffish, abject, and prone to an attack.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

I hate checking on the river because I really want to see a showdown against an opponent like this. I wish you had some post flop reads to help. I really don't see getting raised on the river -- he would have told you he had a K by now.

I'm afraid that if you check, you're going to be folding to a bluff from a loose opponent with a missed drawing hand *enough of the time* (like an A, T, 9, or wired pair he's calling down with no matter what). I try not to give opponents with PF stats like he has much credit for a hand (even if he's passive post flop, and especially if he's aggressive post flop -- his PF stats probably indicate the latter).

Whatch you guys think?

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

Id just check it.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

My initial reaction was that checking the flop would have been best, however thinking about it more we have ~12 outs (im only giving 0.5 outs to a T) which means about 12 * 4 = 48% equity.

Therefore isnt a bet on this flop a bet for value?

On the river, i think its very unlikely we are going to get called by a hand that we beat (if he has a J we are spliting most of the time). Its a pity we dont have any AF number for villian..but if he is a tad aggro i would go for a check/call and hopefully induce a bluff from a busted str8 draw.

After all we only have to win ~17% of the time to turn a profit, and i can see villian having a str8 draw more than that. Against a passive opponent a check/fold is best.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

first up i check the flop,
1) when you hit your straight you want other players in
2) it will give you better information on the vils respective ranges
3) someone else will probably bet it anyway
4) you are probably behind without the equity to value bet

im gonna go out on a limb tho and say check/call the river.

if he has a K there is a good chance you would have heard from him by now, and a Q or J most likely checks behind on the river for fear you are getting fancy with trips (only at this level of course)

besides even if another J does decide to bet it is highly likely a split.

i think a bet from a player that plays this many hands is much more likely to indicate a bluff from a naked ace or missed T, remember he is playing a lot so hands like T8 or T7s are all possible. definitely he is bluffing more than 1 in 7 anyway.

so yeah, check flop, check/call river

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

I kept going and bet the river, he mucked. Guessing he missed his straight.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

[ QUOTE ]
I kept going and bet the river, he mucked. Guessing he missed his straight.

[/ QUOTE ]
you see why the river is a poor place to bet, right?

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

grunch

I don't think I'm betting this. Getting raised on this flop blows. Check/fold.

Re: JTs against a loose passive
 

[ QUOTE ]
So why not check the flop with the intent of raising if it's 1 bet back? It is likely that the bettor will call one bet back. Then check the turn, gambling that the flop bettor will also check for fear of being checkraised. If it works, you get to see the river for 1 BB. If the turn is a blank and the flop bettor bets again, you can be much more sure you're beat and fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem (or more accurately, one problem) with this logic is that you won't be able to fold if villain bets a turn blank because of your straight outs.

[ QUOTE ]
Because hero has a lot of outs, he really wants to see both the turn and the river.

[/ QUOTE ]