TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

I’ve been trying a new move lately after reading so much on these forums about controlling pot size, especially with a vulnerable hand like an over pair or TPTK. I’m not completely comfortable with this type of play because my instincts are always to push hard when I think I’m ahead, so please let me know what you think.

Party/Empire $100NL with $1 BB

Hero has $88 and Villain has me slightly covered. Not much of a read on Villain, but seems to be OK but not great.

MP calls and folded to Hero in CO with As-Qc who makes it $5 to go. Villain in SB calls, BB calls, and MP limper calls.

($20) Flop: Qd 9d 3h

Villain bets out $3, fold, fold, Hero raise to $20 and Villain calls.

I’m thinking he is either on a diamond draw or has me crushed with a set and is hoping to get raised with the smallish $3 bet. I’m thinking to myself, keep in mind the 2+2 forums ideas of keeping the pot small with this hand. So I raise to 20 to make sure I don’t let the draw hit for cheap.

($60) Turn: Qd 9d 3 h 9s

Villain checks. I figure the 9s is harmless since you wouldn’t think he calls 20 on the flop with second pair. If I bet here I’m thinking I have to bet 30 which pretty much commits my stack to this hand, since I have something like 60 left. Again, I’m thinking I’m either crushed by a set or way away of his weaker Q. I decide to check behind in an effort to control the pot and figuring I can probably then call something in the range of 20-35 on the river assuming no diamond or K.. Right move?

(60) River: Qd 9d 3h 9s 2c

Villain checks. At this point, I’m sure I have the best hand, because if he was going for the check raise on the turn there’s no way he checks the river after I checked behind him on the turn. My gut is telling me he has K-Q, since he called the 20 on the flop OOP. I decide to value bet the river for 20 pretty sure he’ll either fold or call with the second best hand, especially since I showed weakness on the turn. Right move?

Again, I’m trying to keep the pot small and not commit my whole stack to this hand. I also feel like there have been a lot of times when I thought I had the best hand in position and continued my bet on the turn only to get check raised and have to fold because I didn’t want to commit my whole stack—even though plenty of times I think the other guy is bluffing. So I guess I’m thinking of this as a general new play for me in similar situations. By controlling the pot, I can call a moderate size river bet which is basically how much I would have put in on the turn anyway, but this way I actually get to the showdown. Of course, I’m risking him hitting the river too, but I also induce river bluffs plenty of times too. This is also a play I would only do in position, I think. Please let me know what you think.

I’ll post the results in a little bit.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

I'm probably sticking in $30 on the turn. I wanna take it down right there. All I can see beating me here is 33 or maybe a slowplayed KK. QQ and 99 seems unlikely. If I can't take it down, at least I wanna make him pay for his draw. If that commits me, so be it.

But I dropped from the 100's a while ago, so this is all open to discussion.

RESULTS: Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

I was really hoping to get some feedback from this one. Anyway, he called my river bet and ended up having K-Q like I thought. I won a $100 pot. I'm still not sure about the play though and would still like thoughts on it, if anyone has any.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

perfectly played, IMO. there's no reason to bet the turn.

when he checks again on the river, you know you have him. it'd have to be a very tricky (or dumb) opponent who would check a 9 or full house twice.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

I make this play often, but I rarely do it with a hand as strong as AQ with a Q939 board and a diamond draw. I would have pushed on the turn, hoping to get called by KQ or QJ or a mid pair. If the guy had a nine - he would win a big pot and I would be ok with that.

Passion

Edit It should be noted that I a big time LAG so that I often find that people call me and push at me with total crap.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I make this play often, but I rarely do it with a hand as strong as AQ with a Q939 board and a diamond draw. I would have pushed on the turn, hoping to get called by KQ or QJ or a mid pair. If the guy had a nine - he would win a big pot and I would be ok with that.

[/ QUOTE ]

there's no piece of advice regularly given out by inexperienced SSNL players on this board that annoys me more than "push and hope".

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

OK I'm uncomfortable disagreeing with swolfe but here goes...


Your flop raise is spot on and I totally agree with your flop reads (also AKd is a poss which has K as a danger card).

To me the villain check on the turn is standard. He's always going to do that. He either wants the c/r or the free card. He certainly doesn't want to call a bet.

So then you're really into what do you think he's more likely to have? the 9 was a good card as it makes 99 unlikely. You have a Q so for a set he is most likely to have have 33. he could also have KK. So only 2 hands that you're really worried about vs a fair few of hands he could have (ie flush draw).

You can be pretty comfortable you're ahead and that he's drawing.

Therefore you have to bet out. The check is dangerous and weak in my view. when the hand is shown down at the end the other players will see your turn play and be able to block bet their draws in future against you.

If villain raises your turn bet you have to fold. And villain probably doesn't call if drawing. If he does call then the river is checked down (or call his value bet depending on size).

Given the way you actually played the turn I think your river bet is fine.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
there's no piece of advice regularly given out by inexperienced SSNL players on this board that annoys me more than "push and hope".

[/ QUOTE ]

It is poker and at best all you can really have is a sense that you are ahead. There is no certaintly.

Perhaps my prior post is flavored by the way that I play and the way that people respond to my play. For July I'm 40%+ VP$IP and 18% PFR. Because of this people make calls against me frequently that they would not make against other players. For me - the call of the 20 on the flop by my opponent would not be an indication that he had a solid holding and I would push the turn expecting to get called by a worse hand. Anybody who has played with me knows that I am fully capable of bluff pushing on the turn so the opponent would be in a tough spot with a hand like JQ or KQ or even 88 after I pushed. Thats why I said I would expect to get called by a worse hand.

If I might also add - our Hero's chips stack going into the turn is slightly less than the pot. If this were a battle of larger stacks (150+) checking the turn would be a much better play IMO.

BTW I have lots of experience playing SSNL - 20K+ hands per month for the past 2-years.

Passion

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
there's no reason to bet the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

To make more money off your TPTK? Don't you think you would have been checkraised/bet into if you were beat?

Also, if he was going for the c/r, he will bet the river every time. If you do not bet the turn, you will not know if he's bluffing because you showed weakness on the turn, or if he's really got you beat.

If you bet the turn and he just calls, you will probably be able to check the river behind. If you are raised, you can get away easily. If he suddenly wakes up on the river and pushes, you can lay it down too. This is the biggest difference with checking behind IMO: if you check behind and he bets a blank river, you practically have to call him, because you will induce many bluffs following your line.

Not saying that you're wrong and I'm right, but what do you think of this?

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
perfectly played, IMO. there's no reason to bet the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I get stuck in situations like this as well, and am not always sure what to do. Can you explain a little why checking behind on the turn is alright? My tendency is to bet again because I don't want to give a free card to a possible flush draw. Is it because the risk of becoming pot committed with an inferior hand outweighs the chance that they're on a flush draw and will hit on the river?

Thanks.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I make this play often, but I rarely do it with a hand as strong as AQ with a Q939 board and a diamond draw. I would have pushed on the turn, hoping to get called by KQ or QJ or a mid pair. If the guy had a nine - he would win a big pot and I would be ok with that.

[/ QUOTE ]

there's no piece of advice regularly given out by inexperienced SSNL players on this board that annoys me more than "push and hope".

[/ QUOTE ]


Thanks for the feedback. I guess I agree with you Swolfe. The reason I played the hand the way I did is b/c I DIDN'T want to be all in with just TPTK.

I think the advantages of this play is that I don't get outplayed on the turn to a bluff and I will induce more bluffs/calls by second bests on the river.

On another hand I played like this (I've only had the opportunity to play 2 like this) I had Qh 9h on the button. Normally wouldn't even play this, but I'm trying to get more sophisicated with my NL game, esp button play. Flop comes 2c 9c 7c and it is checked to me. I bet out the pot for $4 and am called by MP. Turn is Kd and MP checs to me. Normally I bet there, but I had a hunch the MP was going check raise me on a bluff and I felt like I had the best hand so I check behind in order to keep the pot small enough that I could call a bet on the river (assuming nothing too scary, of course). The river was a harmless 3d (2c 9c 7c Kd 3d). I felt like I had the best hand, because I felt like a pair of kings would bet the turn. Anyway with only $12 in the pot (since I made a conscious effort to keept it that way) they guy bets $6 into me. I felt pretty comfortable calling $6 into what was now an $18 pot. Turns out the guy had Jd 8d. I can't believe he called the flop with just a gut shot on a board with 3 clubs. I'm sure he was looking to take it away from me on the turn, which I would have obviously had to give him had I bet the turn. Also, my check of the turn induced his small bluff on the river.

Like I said, I've only done this play twice so far, but it seems like it might be real successful in the long run. I'm just sick and tired of being check raised all the time on the turn and having to lay down what I think is probably the best hand. But I'm not real comfortable with the play either. Any thoughtful challenges to the play or suggested changes would be very welcome.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
perfectly played, IMO. there's no reason to bet the turn.

when he checks again on the river, you know you have him. it'd have to be a very tricky (or dumb) opponent who would check a 9 or full house twice.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't often disagree with you but I do here. The weak lead on the flop is often a draw trying to price itself in. I like OP's raise here. Now when the turn doesn't complete the draw, I like to bet to again charge what I feel is likely a draw for my opponent. If I get checkraised on the turn, I'm folding. I don't think players at this level will weak-lead/call the flop, then checkraise semibluff the turn with anything I can beat. Then I check behind on almost all rivers (I'd probably bet a Q river on this board hoping to get a crying call from a badly played 9 or other underfull).

So, in short, I like raise flop, bet turn (1/2 pot), check behind on river best as it charges the draws but never puts me in a spot where I have to make a tough decision (as I might have to if I check the turn and face a big bet/checkraise on the river)

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
OK I'm uncomfortable disagreeing with swolfe but here goes...


Your flop raise is spot on and I totally agree with your flop reads (also AKd is a poss which has K as a danger card).

To me the villain check on the turn is standard. He's always going to do that. He either wants the c/r or the free card. He certainly doesn't want to call a bet.

So then you're really into what do you think he's more likely to have? the 9 was a good card as it makes 99 unlikely. You have a Q so for a set he is most likely to have have 33. he could also have KK. So only 2 hands that you're really worried about vs a fair few of hands he could have (ie flush draw).

You can be pretty comfortable you're ahead and that he's drawing.

Therefore you have to bet out. The check is dangerous and weak in my view. when the hand is shown down at the end the other players will see your turn play and be able to block bet their draws in future against you.

If villain raises your turn bet you have to fold. And villain probably doesn't call if drawing. If he does call then the river is checked down (or call his value bet depending on size).

Given the way you actually played the turn I think your river bet is fine.

[/ QUOTE ]


I guess this was my problem though. After the flop there is about $60 in the pot and I have about $60 in my stack and Villain has me barely covered. To bet the turn I probably have to bet 1/2 pot of $30. If I'm raised here it would be to $60 which would put me all in. With my 30 the 60 raise and the 60 in the pot there is $150 in the pot. Can I really fold to a C/R on the turn when I'm being laid 5 to 1? Certainly I would have to call right? But the thing is that I really don't want to committ my whole stack to just TPTK. So I checked the turn in order to keep the pot small (maybe I misunderstand the concept of controlling pot size, so help me wth that). I knew that I would have to call any moderate bet on the river since I showed weakness. Anyway, it is exactly the turn play that I wonder about. To bet 30 seems to be committing my whole stack to this hand if I get raised. Am I wrong? And is there a better way to do this?

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

i'm revising my answer [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

i didn't read carefully enough and missed the diamond draw. i had read it as diamonds showing up with the turn 9...don't ask me how because on rereading, it's pretty clear.

i need to think about this some more. my intuition tells me that check here is better because the pot is already big and any bet i make ought to be a push. i don't want to leave myself $30 on a diamond river with a $120 pot. i don't like backing TPTK with my stack without a good read.

if he's on a draw, he has probably ~20% equity. if not he probably either has 4% or 96%, which we'll estimate as 0 and 100. his total equity has to be less than 33% to make betting correct because 2:1 is the worst odds we can lay him.

Eq = %drawing*.2 + %made hand winning

How often is he drawing? How often is he beating us? These are read dependant, but if we say 50 and 25 then his equity is about 35%.

I think it's close either way and in the end probably doesn't matter. Checking is probably lower variance because you can value bet if the river blanks and fold if it doesn't.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

yes i agree your stack size is causing a problem here.

But I think a turn bet of $40 is ok. He's not getting drawing odds for his flush. If he shoves that bet then I'm still folding it. He's saying he has a set and so you're drawing dead so save you last $20

yes he might be bluffing but at the end of the day if a player's going to rep the nuts the first time I meet him he's definitely going to get a fold from me. You have no reason to think he'd be bluffing.

He's far more likely to shove the flop to a semi bluff than the turn as he has a lot more fold equity on the flop (and more chances to draw).


You don't need to be play scared about running into the nuts. If you happen to have a big hand while someone has the nuts then it will cost you no question - but even here it wont stack you. And you do have a big hand here given that board.

I think the key thing for me is that he's far more likely to be drawing than laying a trap.

Also think of it from his view. You raised PF. You bet the Q high flop and turn despite his bet into you on the flop. You are clearly stating you have at least the Q. If he actually bluffs you here not knowing you then he's probably a lunatic and that will become apparent soon enough. So you'll probably get your money back.

Players will only make bluffs if they think you will fold else what's the point. He has no reaon to think you will fold to a shove (despite the fact I'm saying I would if I don't know the player - ie I think most players at this table wouldn't fold to the shove).

Also presumably he doesnt know you either so again why would he risk you taking his stack by calling his bluff?

I just don't see him shoving any hand that's not already ahead. And even KK (the realistic worst hand he could be ahead with) you should be folding to (5 outs for you).

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

another thing is that i would often make this same flop raise/turn check with a diamond draw or JT. it's more harmonious with that play for me to check behind other hands here.

also, we'll have a much better idea of our equity once we see the river.

would KQ call a turn push?

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

villains underbet on the flop does look like a flush draw.

alternatively you could try something like raise to $12 on the flop (you are still charging him incorrect odds for the draw as its $9 to call in to a $35 pot for a 1 card flush).

then pot on turn is $44, you bet 1/2 pot.

I don't do this very often but from a theory perspective without regard for metagame it makes sense.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
another thing is that i would often make this same flop raise/turn check with a diamond draw or JT. it's more harmonious with that play for me to check behind other hands here.




That's the thing, I felt like he didn't want to call the flop bet of 20. When he first bet 3, I thought maybe a draw, but he hesitated and then called the 20. I was pretty sure at that point that he had a good Q, most likely K-Q. Anyway, I figured he was good enough to fold a draw OOP to a bet of 20. So then I figured he either had me crushed and was looking to milk me by getting me to commit on the turn, or I had him crushed. Thus, I checked the turn. Let me emphasize this again. After the flop call, I was real sure he didn't have the diamond draw. That's why I didn't mention it after the flop in my original post, which I didn't realize and I probably should have. And, I don't think he would have called a push on the turn, but who knows.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

If you're pretty confident he's not on a draw and either has a Q or a set then you surely still have to bet it? The check still gives a free card. You can't like any K, J, T?

Another danger the turn check has is it now hands him fold equity if he shoves the river which now becomes a more viable option. Now your range of possible holdings in his eyes has widened to include AK, JJ, TT, 99(?poss lower) AJ(?) all of which he's beating.

Do you call a river shove following your turn check?

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you're pretty confident he's not on a draw and either has a Q or a set then you surely still have to bet it? The check still gives a free card. You can't like any K, J, T?

Another danger the turn check has is it now hands him fold equity if he shoves the river which now becomes a more viable option. Now your range of possible holdings in his eyes has widened to include AK, JJ, TT, 99(?poss lower) AJ(?) all of which he's beating.

Do you call a river shove following your turn check?

[/ QUOTE ]


No I don't call an all in on the river. But I might call up to $40 and definitely call $35 or less. And any K, J, or 10 on the river, and I check the river. Any real big bet on the river, I fold. Like I said, I'm not necessarily comfortable with this play and it goes against my normal apply pressure, more pressure, and more pressure style. I'm just playing around with it, and I really appreciate everyone's feedback.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

One caveat that I always like to remember in "controlling pot size" threads is to watch out for players who are clearly thinking very seriously about the game.

These players will know what you are doing. Not only will they call your flop bets OOP with their iffy draws because they know you might check behind on the turn, but they will pick up on how often and in what situations you make value bets.

Of course, they will also start to piece together when they can blow you off of your hand with a scare card, as your hand range becomes predictable.

This isn't too important at NL $100, but it's something that you should keep in the back of your mind.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
there's no piece of advice regularly given out by inexperienced SSNL players on this board that annoys me more than "push and hope".

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm revising my answer [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

i didn't read carefully enough and missed the diamond draw. i had read it as diamonds showing up with the turn 9...don't ask me how because on rereading, it's pretty clear.

i need to think about this some more. my intuition tells me that check here is better because the pot is already big and any bet i make ought to be a push. i don't want to leave myself $30 on a diamond river with a $120 pot. i don't like backing TPTK with my stack without a good read.

if he's on a draw, he has probably ~20% equity. if not he probably either has 4% or 96%, which we'll estimate as 0 and 100. his total equity has to be less than 33% to make betting correct because 2:1 is the worst odds we can lay him.

Eq = %drawing*.2 + %made hand winning

How often is he drawing? How often is he beating us? These are read dependant, but if we say 50 and 25 then his equity is about 35%.

I think it's close either way and in the end probably doesn't matter. Checking is probably lower variance because you can value bet if the river blanks and fold if it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm taking this as an apology [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Passion

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

I think if it was headsup to the flop, checking the turn has merits as the likely hood of him being on a diamond draw is low.

however, since it was 4 to the flop, the diamond draw becomes a much more likely candi

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

You played it perfectly to the river when you probably missed some value. I would bet much more on the river because after your turn check Vilain will often think that you are bluffing here.

Best wishes

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
would KQ call a turn push?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably not but KQ will almost always call river push after turn check.

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
alternatively you could try something like raise to $12 on the flop (you are still charging him incorrect odds for the draw as its $9 to call in to a $35 pot for a 1 card flush).


[/ QUOTE ]

These are correct odds to draw in no-limit holdem because there is some bluffing equity if one of the str8 cards hit on the turn even more so if Villain has J10 these odds are more than correct and you are losing tons of money here.
But charging Villain for incorrect odds is not the most important thing in this hand. The most important thing here is to charge KQ (or even QJ for some crazy Villains) for maximum and raising flop/checking turn/betting river is perfect play for the purpose.

Best wishes

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
alternatively you could try something like raise to $12 on the flop (you are still charging him incorrect odds for the draw as its $9 to call in to a $35 pot for a 1 card flush).


[/ QUOTE ]

These are correct odds to draw in no-limit holdem because there is some bluffing equity if one of the str8 cards hit on the turn even more so if Villain has J10 these odds are more than correct and you are losing tons of money here.
But charging Villain for incorrect odds is not the most important thing in this hand. The most important thing here is to charge KQ (or even QJ for some crazy Villains) for maximum and raising flop/checking turn/betting river is perfect play for the purpose.

Best wishes

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry for being totally dense but why is ,"... raising flop/checking turn/betting river ..." better than raising flop/betting turn ...

Why is charging the villan the maximum for KQ so important that you can give up charging a possible flush for a free card on the turn?

Re: TPTK, controlling the pot size question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
alternatively you could try something like raise to $12 on the flop (you are still charging him incorrect odds for the draw as its $9 to call in to a $35 pot for a 1 card flush).


[/ QUOTE ]

These are correct odds to draw in no-limit holdem because there is some bluffing equity if one of the str8 cards hit on the turn even more so if Villain has J10 these odds are more than correct and you are losing tons of money here.
But charging Villain for incorrect odds is not the most important thing in this hand. The most important thing here is to charge KQ (or even QJ for some crazy Villains) for maximum and raising flop/checking turn/betting river is perfect play for the purpose.

Best wishes

[/ QUOTE ]

again, I usually don't care about charging draws as I feel this forum typically overcounts the number of times that villain has a draw here but villain's play here really looks more like a draw than KQ.

Despite being one of the biggest advocates of turn checks on this forum, I hate checking this turn especially given that villain is passive enough to not block/bluff river.