Two Folds

[naphand]

One thing I have noticed about my game is that I launch into games very aggressively, and am very willing to take people on straight away. This often leads to quite a lot of chip-splurging early on as I establish reads and, perhap, my image. I am not so sure that this is very productive, as players seem very willing to fight and some are certainly capable of trapping you (there are a lot of LAGs obviously).

To this end I have been "experimenting" with playing tighter and more passively for the first 20-30 hands, rope-a-doping a little before cranking up the aggro with some read-based plays. This seems the standard ploy, though it has not been for me previously.

Both hands are early in the game.


HAND 1

CO is a passive calling station.

Poker Room $2/$4 (5-max, 5 handed)

Preflop: Naphand is SB with 8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]
UTG folds, CO raises, Button folds, Naphand raises, BB calls, CO caps, Naphand calls, BB calls.

Flop: (12 SB) 2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 3 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 5 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (3 players)
Naphand checks, BB bets, CO raises, Naphand folds, BB raises, CO calls.


BB has hit the flop and he called 2 cold PF, could be a lot of things but I doubt he attacks a PF capper with top pair. CO raises again after capping PF, this looks very much like a big PP. 2 outs to improve, standard against a passive player?


HAND 2

CO is LAG and caps easily with draws and pairs of any description. Button is unknown. BB is tight.

Poker Room $2/$4 (5-max, 5 handed)

Preflop: Naphand is SB with A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
UTG folds, CO raises, Button calls, Naphand calls, BB folds.

Flop: (7 SB) Q [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 6 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (3 players)
Naphand checks, CO bets, Button raises, Naphand calls, CO calls.

Turn: (6.5 BB) T [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (3 players)
Naphand checks, CO bets, Button raises, Naphand folds...


PF I am not reducing this field with a raise and I know I can CR LAG any time with a friendly board, best to let him bet it (he will auto-bet almost any board even after Button's raise). Button I know nothing about, if I knew his standards better I 3-bet and CO probably caps. Flop is very good for me; CO makes his auto-bet and Button raises again, I only call. I suspect Button is on a flush draw (possibly AA-99). The plan is to CR the Turn if no [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] falls or if it is only 1 bet to me. The Turn T [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] could mean a lot of things for LAG, but Button is certainly not afraid of the 3rd suit and me waiting behind. I am drawing to 3rd-nut and possibly dead already.

In hindsight I particularly don't like either of these cold-calls, I think I should 3-bet both times. Does anyone have anything to support this line, apart from the dubious "observational" aspect? What about the fold?

Results later.

[PokerNoob]

Hand 1 looks ok when a passive calling station caps and raises the flop this looks like a pocket pair higher than eights and you have to dodge BB. When he 3-bets behind after your fold, you've got to feel pretty good.

Hand 2 I would check threebet that flop, regardless of my plan to play passive. If you just sat down, you might not know button is raising to isolate with worse than AQ. I lead the turn and take it from there. If your plan is to look like a station, you might as well call down with TPTK and 3rd nut redraw. Does Poker Room show the losing hands?

[Scotch78]

Hand 1:

I don't know about you, but 88 is at the bottom end of my 3-betting range. You're out of position and the aggressor is normally passive, so I fold this one pre-flop. The flop fold is even easier to make.

Hand 2:

I usually re-raise pre-flop with AQ, but not sure which way this one would swing for me. With TPTK I want to get it heads-up against the LAG, and he's likely to auto-raise if I lead into him, so that's what I do.

Scott

[naphand]

HAND 1:

I just checked CO's PFR and it was 1.23%, a figure which perhaps should lead me to fold this PF. Something around 5-6% is probably necessary in order for there to be a reasonable chance of raises with less than premium PP. Anyone care to divulge the math of this? I don't recall any discussion about what the various PFR percentages amount to.

The action from the Turn goes: bet-call, bet-call (CO true to type). CO shows AA and BB wins with 35o OMG [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]


HAND 2:

CO just calls Buttons Turn raise and check-calls a River rag. CO shows T9o (classic LAG hand) and Button turns over A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]


Both folds were "right". Pre-flop in Hand 1 I think a case could be made for folding based on CO's PFR%, though I am happy with it. There were certainly questions about Hand 2; I think the merits of 3-betting PF could be debated, but certainly this flop needs a 3-bet. What happened here was that my resolution not to leap into hands guns blazing from the get-go unintentionally put me in a passive mode. How do others feel about AQo in this situation. i.e. out of position against a LAG and Button raisor? I feel that 3-bet may not always be right here.

[Scotch78]

[ QUOTE ]
Pre-flop in Hand 1 I think a case could be made for folding based on CO's PFR%

[/ QUOTE ]

A case could be made for it? Please try and make a case against it.

Scott

PS Today I was holding AQ and the player to my right raises. My nifty little PlayerView HUD tells me he has a 1% PFR after 1,000+ hands. I fold, of course. Then after everyone else folds to his flop bet he turns over 72o!

[naphand]

You just made the case.... [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Sample sizes on PT can be small (this was 167 hands).

[Scotch78]

Ehh, 167 isn't too big, but I still don't like it. However, now that I know you're using anecdotal evidence to justify your poker theories, I understand why you make these mistakes.

Scott

[PokerNoob]

Lol, obvious misclick. On second thought, maybe not. Maybe he only raises 72o as some kind of fetish.

[naphand]

I played 1 game where I 3-bet Aq PF and Button cold-called 3, and went on to win with 73o when he picked up trips. He claimed he had mis-clicked, when I checked the table history he had won the previous 4-5 hands. I was not a mis-click... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I regulalry see players just suddenly making random raises with complete trash. There is either a lot of mis-clicking going on, or some players just love to gamble on the spur.

[naphand]

Captain bizarre strikes again.

No poker theory was proposed, you made the case yourself. I merely pointed it out. I assume you are playing on Cryptologic? as the only realistic explanation for their stultifying slow play is; they are checking PT before they make every decision... [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]