|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
NL 200, a situation that confuses me
Hero ~1,000 Villian ~300
5-handed UTG calls, Hero calls with QJ clubs, Villian raises to 8, sb calls, bb calls, UTG calls, Hero calls. Family pot. Flop: Ac 5c 7c (pot ~40) UTG checks, hero bets 35, Villian calls, everyone else folds. Turn: 5d (Pot ~110) Hero checks, Villian checks. River: 10h (Pot ~110) Hero bets 70, Villian pushes...so you call? Villian is very aggressive, and i haven't really figured out his betting patterns yet. This situation always confuses me against aggressive opponents. Normally I just try to assign a hand range quickly and figure out the percentage of time i think he bluffs or overplays a hand. But at the time I really hadn't figured this guy out yet; I had no instincts at all in this hand. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL 200, a situation that confuses me
I usually raise PF, but it is of preference. Limping is ok too.
Why not bet on the turn? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL 200, a situation that confuses me
call in a heartbeat
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL 200, a situation that confuses me
I'd only be sorry he didn't have a bigger stack.
What's with the check on the turn? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL 200, a situation that confuses me
[ QUOTE ]
I'd only be sorry he didn't have a bigger stack. What's with the check on the turn? [/ QUOTE ] To induce a bluff? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Results/Thoughts
First, I almost never raise preflop with QJ. Generally, if I have good control of the table I'll raise with 56,67,89, (sometimes J10), and most gapper connectors.
Second the turn check: Against a tighter opponent, ie-abc player or weak tight, I check the turn many times in these situations for pot control. Similarly, against a tricky aggro player I check this turn for pot control, but also to induce a bluff. Against a shmuck aggro player, I check this turn to induce a bluff. But, against an aggro player whose tendencies I haven't figured out yet, this is a tricky situation for me. If I bet and he calls, then what do I do on the river? A blocking bet I guess. If I bet and he raises, then this sometimes causes me to make incorrect decisions; I often think "Well, he'd slowplay a fullhouse, and would he really raise with xx preflop? Wouldn't he raise me on the flop with a set? I'll call." Against a tricky LAG, this is bad reasoning; this is what causes good LAGs to be so tough. Incidentally, I did use this reasoning on the river. I checked, for pot control, he checked behind and I figured I was ahead. I value bet the river, he pushed and I decided that his hand range was too wide for me to make this laydown without a strong read. I called and he had A10. Lucky river for me I guess. To the guy who said that it'd be cool if my opponent had a bigger stack, I disagree. The bigger the stacks the harder this situation is for me. This is a really easy hand against abc and tag players, and even easier against a maniac. But it's pretty confusing vs a good player, in my opinion. |
|
|