Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter

Dude here is 50/30/2.

Preflop: Hero is Button with A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, SB calls, BB calls.

Flop: (6 SB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, SB calls, BB folds.

Turn: (4 BB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">SB raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, SB calls.

River: (10 BB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: 10 BB


This dude was a LAG, but I can't remember the numbers.


Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 5 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is BB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, SB completes, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, SB calls.

Flop: (4 SB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, SB calls.

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

River: (9 BB) T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: 9 BB


I'm on a nice 120 BB downswing the last few days and I'm 90% sure made these plays out of frustration, both within a few minutes of each other. They are in no way standard for me. There may be some merit to the first one, however. I need to think about it now.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

in hand 1 will the guy not fire off a desperation bluff with a busted draw if that's what he has on the turn?

meaning you will always get 3 bets out of him by just calling down if this is his holding.

you will also never risk being capped, and you also keep the chance to raise him on a river T or A, as opposed to him check/calling after your sign of strength on the turn.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
in hand 1 will the guy not fire off a desperation bluff with a busted draw if that's what he has on the turn?

[/ QUOTE ]

This was something I was thinking about. Problem is, not everyone will do this. MOST will, but not all.

Also, if this is a total bluff, I'd like him to fold to my turn 3-bet right there. So there is another side to it.

[ QUOTE ]
You will also never risk being capped

[/ QUOTE ]

If he's capping, I'm folding. I know how to handle a cap fine, so it's not a big issue.

[ QUOTE ]
you also keep the chance to raise him on a river T or A, as opposed to him check/calling after your sign of strength on the turn

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't mean anything. Either way I can get in 1 extra bet if I hit on the river.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

yeah, that is the other side - having him fold 6 outs here getting 9:1 is great.

this is a very hard problem to quantify really - on this board i would assume there are too many made hands or worthy draws that he will definitely call with to really make this factor very significant.

i still think the fact that he is likely to lead with his bluffs unimproved is the overriding factor.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

i cant see how your line is superior to calling down, especially against the lag who will bet when he misses anyway.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you also keep the chance to raise him on a river T or A, as opposed to him check/calling after your sign of strength on the turn

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't mean anything. Either way I can get in 1 extra bet if I hit on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
yeah you're right

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
i still think the fact that he is likely to lead with his bluffs unimproved is the overriding factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

I can get him to put in the same amount of bets (except now guaranteed), but with the added benefit of him folding hands I want him too. Also, I was going to put in 3 bets here anyways, so there is no downside I can find to 3-betting the turn.

The only thing that screws with me is him donking a blank river as a bluff. I doubt this happens much though after I show so much turn strength; he can't expect a fold.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
i cant see how your line is superior to calling down, especially against the lag who will bet when he misses anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Read my posts. You'll see my reasoning. Let me know why you disagree.

I think hand #2 is more interesting, but I haven't had a chance to think about it too much yet.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

So with hand 1...

I'm folding to almost any bet on the river, unless I improve.

If I had just called, I probably fold to completed draws. This should make a difference IMO, because in these cases I was only going to put in 2 bets originally and now I've put in 3.

On the flip side, if I hit, I've gotten in 4 big bets instead of just 3, so the effect of not putting in that 3rd bet on the river by folding is mitigated.

Also, there is some % of the time I'm going to call a river draw completing card.

It's very hard to compute all of this, but at least I'm coming up with some reasons against what I did. Not sure how strong the arguments are either way, though I'm sure the knee-jerk reaction is to just call the turn. At the very least, exploring other options will prove a decent learning tool.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

perhaps the reason it is so hard to figure out the problem is because we're debating between calling and 3-betting when the correct decision is to fold?

basically like trying to solve the quadratic equation until you realize (b^2-4ac) is negative...

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
perhaps the reason it is so hard to figure out the problem is because we're debating between calling and 3-betting when the correct decision is to fold?

basically like trying to solve the quadratic equation until you realize (b^2-4ac) is negative...

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no way that folding is right here. I'm almost certain he's FOS or drawing often enough to call down at the least.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
perhaps the reason it is so hard to figure out the problem is because we're debating between calling and 3-betting when the correct decision is to fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your pretty sure these were frustration plays? How bout I guarantee you these were frustration plays...

My best idea for you is don't tilt and even better dont make posts trying to convinvce yourself and us all that tilting is actually a good idea.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
There's no way that folding is right here. I'm almost certain he's FOS or drawing often enough to call down at the least.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obvviously you are the one at the table and so you have seen the preceeding hands and there is a very good chance the guy is FOS so yes calling down is def an option in Hand 1. However I dont see any point to 3-betting unless you know your A or T is coming on the river.

In Hand 2 I think folding is likely right but if your read says so calling down might be OK I just never see how 3-betting is a good idea here.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

You can't fold to a cap in hand 2, so you shouldn't 3bet.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can't fold to a cap in hand 2, so you shouldn't 3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know your wrong when BZ urges moderation...

Seriosuly this thread will be complete as soon as AggroHUSHPoster contributes...

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

You must be thinking on a level above me, because I really don't see the benefit of 3-betting in either hand.

If you think your hand in first case is worth a showdown, why not just call-down?

Only reason I see to 3-bet in second situation is if you think villain got aggressive on turn because of a good flush draw. Doesn't seem possible to make that opponent fold a better hand.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can't fold to a cap in hand 2, so you shouldn't 3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was my issue. I'm fairly certain he doesn't have an ace (or he would have raised PF). A smaller pocket pair, a made flush (though he'd probably c/r the flop), or a pair with a spade are all possibilities. As is a set.

The problem is against this range I can't fold because of my possible spade being good. And then if I make the flush, I again can't fold. And even if I don't, I'm still ahead of his range enough to call down.

Basically, I'm going to get the same in most of the time, but he's gonna pull another bet out of me when I'm behind by a fair amount.

I don't like hand 2 either and I'm certain it was a tilted play after thinking about it.

Now back to hand 1...

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

"i still think the fact that he is likely to lead with his bluffs unimproved is the overriding factor."

This is a correct thought in many situations, where you get your 3bets if he misses but save a bet when he hits. But it is also very important to show LAGs that when they checkraise the turn, they are risking more than just 2 bets. If you can get a 50/30/2 to ease up and check-call more often vs. you, now you have a bona-fide fish at your table (rather than a fish who can bite every so often).

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
You must be thinking on a level above me, because I really don't see the benefit of 3-betting in either hand.

If you think your hand in first case is worth a showdown, why not just call-down?

[/ QUOTE ]

I want him to fold a straight bluff with 6 outs. I will never put in more than I was going to already anyways. I don't want him to quit on a semi-bluff and not fire the river.

[ QUOTE ]
Only reason I see to 3-bet in second situation is if you think villain got aggressive on turn because of a good flush draw. Doesn't seem possible to make that opponent fold a better hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do think a pair + spade (or pp with spade) is in his range a lot, but I'm still better off calling down. Hand 1 is closer IMO.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
perhaps the reason it is so hard to figure out the problem is because we're debating between calling and 3-betting when the correct decision is to fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your pretty sure these were frustration plays? How bout I guarantee you these were frustration plays...

My best idea for you is don't tilt and even better dont make posts trying to convinvce yourself and us all that tilting is actually a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does the line you quoted have to do with your response?

The second hand I've conceded was bad after I had some time to think about it.

I still like the first hand, however. I'm the only one who has even tried to argue against it by using some sort of logical reasoning (I've also argued for it using that same reasoning). It's close, but I'm leaning towards liking my 3-bet. I'm still up for debate on it, but no one has actually debated with me than to say, "why don't you just call down?" which I've answered.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
still like the first hand, however. I'm the only one who has even tried to argue against it by using some sort of logical reasoning (I've also argued for it using that same reasoning). It's close, but I'm leaning towards liking my 3-bet. I'm still up for debate on it, but no one has actually debated with me than to say, "why don't you just call down?" which I've answered.

[/ QUOTE ]
yeah i thought about it some more. you've been right in saying that you're not risking any more bets by 3-betting here and either folding to a cap or folding to a river donk. you're also right that you're still going to get all your bets in if you do improve whether you 3-bet or call the turn.

the pot is 7 BB when it gets to you, and this is the part of the "equation" that most significantly affects wanting him to fold pure bluffs, because that's the only benefit i can see from the turn 3-bet.

if you call, the pot is 8 BB and you allow him to bluff again (or value bet if he hits) with his pure bluffs. assuming he always has 6 outs with his pure bluffs (which he doesn't, especially because i think he'd do this a lot with Ax), he will improve 6/40 times (52 - 4 tens - 4 aces - 4 board cards), or he is 5.7:1 to improve. you obviously want him to fold 6 outs.

obviously this is only a tiny part of it all. you have to know how often he is actually doing this with a pure bluff and how often he will actually call you with two random overcards.

and something you touched on earlier - about using our judgment whether or not to call the river. i think this may be pretty important since we should be able to somewhat decently estimate how much certain river cards affect our equity.

tough problem

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

I'd rather gouge my own eyes out than 3-bet either turn.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
you've been right in saying that you're not risking any more bets by 3-betting here and either folding to a cap or folding to a river donk.

[/ QUOTE ]

But by folding to a cap, we miss out on the chance to improve to a hand that might beat a hand that is presently beating us.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you've been right in saying that you're not risking any more bets by 3-betting here and either folding to a cap or folding to a river donk.

[/ QUOTE ]

But by folding to a cap, we miss out on the chance to improve to a hand that might beat a hand that is presently beating us.

[/ QUOTE ]
yeah but how often is someone (even this guy) capping K8 or 99 here?

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you've been right in saying that you're not risking any more bets by 3-betting here and either folding to a cap or folding to a river donk.

[/ QUOTE ]

But by folding to a cap, we miss out on the chance to improve to a hand that might beat a hand that is presently beating us.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he's capping it's with a better hand than I can draw out to the vast majority of the time. There's no way I call a cap.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather gouge my own eyes out than 3-bet either turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

While that's an interesting fact, I'd still like to hear some reasons why 3-betting the turn in the first hand is bad.

I agree on the 2nd hand, however.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather gouge my own eyes out than 3-bet either turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, but the way this thread has been going, I'm sure Metetron could find a way to argue that gouging your eyes out is also +EV.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
While that's an interesting fact, I'd still like to hear some reasons why 3-betting the turn in the first hand is bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because a very aggro player(like the one in your example) will bet the river with a bluff quite often. By 3-betting you expose yourself to a bluff or to losing your outs when he goes crazy with a draw or a worse hand you're drawing live against and you earn the same amount when you have the best hand.

If your opponent will bet the river as a bluff and won't fold any hands you want to induce a fold from, you should not raise for a free showdown.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish in either hand, especially hand 1.

Are you 3-betting the turn for value because you think you have the best hand or as a bluff hoping he folds? If it's the latter, you really need to re-evaluate the types of hands that LAGs fold before showdown.

If you're 3-betting for value, it's so thin that it makes zero sense. You can make the same amount of bets when ahead by calling down and you will never get outplayed. On top of that, you get to go for less when behind, which is much more often the case here. I realize you said you're going for only 3 bets either way, but keep in mind that by folding the current or potential winner, you're essentially going for more than 3 bets.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

Okay, those last 2 responses make sense.

Basically, what I am trying to get out of this has such marginal positive value, that setting myself up for him to outplay me is not worth it.

I can dig that.


Edit: Gouging your eyes out is +EV.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

Hey,

I haven't really read the responses yet, but the play you make in hand 1 is the type of play i like to make when I think my opponent might have A high as well. In this particular caes it looks like he either a)has what he's representing, or b) has some random semibluff-non-A-high hand

I think it's better to call down and let him fire another on the river.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

This sort of stuff is about a hundred million times better off when applied to a TAG rather than a LAG.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

I think the play is fine when used in just the right situatuion against just the right opponent, but it obviously needs to be used sparingly given the number of bets you need to put in. That said, I think that the first hand is the right type of situation.