simple 3/6 hand from an inexperienced limit player

[Proofrock]

UTG seems to be pretty solid.

Preflop: UTG raises, folds to Hero in BB with J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 10[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], Hero calls.

Flop(4 small bets): A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
Hero checks, UTG bets, Hero calls.

Turn(3 big bets): K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
Hero checks, UTG bets, Hero calls.

River(5 big bets): Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
Hero bets, UTG raises, Hero calls.

Questions:
Preflop: call okay getting 3 to 1?

Flop: I assume the flop call is alright getting 4 to 1 with 12 outs, but if not, please explain why.

Turn: Now that the board has paired and I could be drawing nearly dead, what's the appropriate play (no strong read on UTG except that he seems pretty solid after roughly 80 hands)? Seems weak to give up on the draw getting 4 to 1, but seems stupid to be drawing to a one-outer.

River: Now that I've made my hand, is it better to bet-call, check-call, check-raise, bet and fold to a raise, or bet-reraise?

Any other comments on how to play (or not play) this hand? Thanks a lot.

-cj

[hobbsmann]

preflop is good.

I think a c/r on this flop could be pretty powerful as you have fair amount of equity in your draws and you might gain enough FE against underpairs to make your c/r followed by a turn lead +EV. That being said a flop c/c is fine as well.

Turn is good. You are only drawing dead to AA/AK/KK and are ahead of the rest of this guy's range and you have odds to draw to your flush/straigt.

Bet/calling the river is good.

[MyTurn2Raise]

preflop...i go back and forth on calling here. I usually (80%) call.

flop...check-raise. This is a great spot to semi-bluff. Perhaps, your opponent had QQ,JJ,TT, or KQ. Might fold...awesome. Either way, 12 outs makes you only a slight dog. Take the initiative and put your opponent on his heels. See how he responds and that will change how the rest of the hand plays.


River....got to call now.

[TightIsRight]

On the flop we have 1 out to a royal flush, 8 outs to the 2nd nut flush, and 3 outs to the nut straight...and we check call? No.

Think about this, you're only a 1.35-1 underdog to AK here. You're only in semi-bad shape against AA or KK (about 2-1). You are in very good shape against pretty much everything else. I check-raise the flop about 100% of the time. Taking the lead will frequently let you win it even when none of your draws get there. Do yourself a favor and don't play like your opponent always has the aces or kings

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
preflop is good.

I think a c/r on this flop could be pretty powerful as you have fair amount of equity in your draws and you might gain enough FE against underpairs to make your c/r followed by a turn lead +EV. That being said a flop c/c is fine as well.

Turn is good. You are only drawing dead to AA/AK/KK and are ahead of the rest of this guy's range and you have odds to draw to your flush/straigt.

Bet/calling the river is good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sweet! A hand where I disagree with Hobbie...

Anyway, here are my thoughts:

1. I don't like a flop check-raise. Many of villain's hands have hit this flop, and you're almost never getting villain to fold a hand with a K or a A. Check-raising the flop only gains fold equity if we lead the turn, which we often don't want to do because much of the time we'll be raised. Underpairs are the only things we want folding, but we have a bunch of outs against them anyway and may actually be favorites with as many as 21 outs.

I prefer either check-calling the flop or leading the flop (this is my favorite line, actually). An underpair may well fold to a flop lead anyway, and we'll get less invested against a better hand. If we get raised, we can simply check-call the turn.

2. I think I like bet-calling the river. I think you may well be in bad trouble if this river gets to three or four bets. 1-2 bets on the river seems right.

[neuroman]

I like Deranged's line of leading the flop. If UTG has a pocket pair QQ or lower, there's a good chance he'll fold right there.

If you get raised, call. If the turn is a Q, lead. If the turn is a heart, I'm torn between leading and a C/R, but leaning toward the C/R. If turn is not a heart or a Q, check/fold.

If you lead the flop and opponent flatcalls, how do you play the turn, W. Deranged?

[Proofrock]

Thanks everybody for your replies. Let me see if I understand what everybody has been saying and provide some of my thoughts on the hand.

There is a contingency that likes check-raising the flop, because it may take control of the hand, I have a lot of pot equity, and combined with leading the turn it may cause smaller pairs to fold. Any FE may well be enough to make this line +EV.

I don't like this for the following reasons (very similar to what W. Deranged wrote, so it's probably unnecessary for me to clutter my response with this, but it's good for me to work through my thoughts).

My only read on Villain is that he's been pretty solid. A solid player raising UTG makes me think AA-QQ, AK, AQ. This range is probably too narrow, but other than JJ or 10 10, I don't know how much further I could expand it. Against that hand range, I only have FE from QQ, JJ, or 10 10, and even then my limited experience at 3/6 tells me I will often get called down. More than 2/3 of that hand range has hit top pair or better, so check-raising will often be reraised here or when I bet the turn, so I'll commit more money to the pot as an underdog. If there was a third person in the pot then I'd be happy to raise the flop, since I'd have an equity edge, but I don't have an edge here against any of Villain's hand range. On the other hand, I'm getting 5:1 to call on the flop, and 4:1 to call on the turn making check-calling +EV. Why decrease my odds if I don't have to?

I understand that it's important to play aggressively -- if this was no limit, 90% of the time I would lead the flop, hoping to be raised so I could push, knowing that if I'm called I'm likely to be only a slight dog.

But since this is limit, my thought process was different. Pot odds dominated my decisions. I was getting good odds to check-call down, but any extra bets I put into the pot would decrease my edge (am I using the right terminology here?). I assumed that fold equity was minimal given Villain's hand range, so check-calling maximizes EV here. Is this line of reasoning flawed? If so, how do you suggest I maximize EV?

W. Deranged, why do you prefer leading the flop to check-calling? If I check-call the flop, does QQ bet again on the turn? What's my plan if Villain flat calls?

Thanks again all for your input on this hand. It seems like a pretty straightforward hand to me, but I'm trying to improve my limit game (I mostly play no-limit) and I'm really not sure how to play optimally in situations like these.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks everybody for your replies. Let me see if I understand what everybody has been saying and provide some of my thoughts on the hand.

There is a contingency that likes check-raising the flop, because it may take control of the hand, I have a lot of pot equity, and combined with leading the turn it may cause smaller pairs to fold. Any FE may well be enough to make this line +EV.

I don't like this for the following reasons (very similar to what W. Deranged wrote, so it's probably unnecessary for me to clutter my response with this, but it's good for me to work through my thoughts).

My only read on Villain is that he's been pretty solid. A solid player raising UTG makes me think AA-QQ, AK, AQ. This range is probably too narrow, but other than JJ or 10 10, I don't know how much further I could expand it. Against that hand range, I only have FE from QQ, JJ, or 10 10, and even then my limited experience at 3/6 tells me I will often get called down. More than 2/3 of that hand range has hit top pair or better, so check-raising will often be reraised here or when I bet the turn, so I'll commit more money to the pot as an underdog. If there was a third person in the pot then I'd be happy to raise the flop, since I'd have an equity edge, but I don't have an edge here against any of Villain's hand range. On the other hand, I'm getting 5:1 to call on the flop, and 4:1 to call on the turn making check-calling +EV. Why decrease my odds if I don't have to?

I understand that it's important to play aggressively -- if this was no limit, 90% of the time I would lead the flop, hoping to be raised so I could push, knowing that if I'm called I'm likely to be only a slight dog.

But since this is limit, my thought process was different. Pot odds dominated my decisions. I was getting good odds to check-call down, but any extra bets I put into the pot would decrease my edge (am I using the right terminology here?). I assumed that fold equity was minimal given Villain's hand range, so check-calling maximizes EV here. Is this line of reasoning flawed? If so, how do you suggest I maximize EV?

W. Deranged, why do you prefer leading the flop to check-calling? If I check-call the flop, does QQ bet again on the turn? What's my plan if Villain flat calls?

Thanks again all for your input on this hand. It seems like a pretty straightforward hand to me, but I'm trying to improve my limit game (I mostly play no-limit) and I'm really not sure how to play optimally in situations like these.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically, let's break down the three different flop lines:

1. Check-calling is obviously +EV. BUT, it gains no possible fold equity at all.

2. Leading the flop gains a little in fold equity over check-calling. It is my belief that this little it gains will outweigh the very slight amount we lose if we get raised and have to pay two bets on the flop instead of one.

3. Check-raising the flop, in my opinion, does not gain heavily in fold equity over simply leading the flop, because:

-It actually makes it less likely that you will win the pot immediately on the flop; you actually tie villain to seeing the turn, which you do not do by simply betting the flop (most opponents are more likely to fold to one bet on the flop than to fold to a flop check-raise... it's a psychological thing).

-We force ourselves to have to bet the turn to cash in our fold equity, which means we open ourselves up to a turn raise (likely given board texture and our read on opponent). Paying two on the turn is often not what we want to be doing.

I would probably bet the flop, calling a raise. I'm probably about 40% - 60 % between betting the turn if I'm not raised on the flop and simply checking. It'll be almost entirely dependent on what I've seen of villain. Against standard opponents, I actually think I'm more likely to get a raise than a fold on the turn, so I'm tempted to check.

My basic thought is that the place to get villain to fold here is simply on the flop. Lines designed to generated folds elsewhere I think don't appreciate that this is an "all or nothing" kind of flop... if villain likes it, he probably likes it a lot and is never folding. If he doesn't like it, he hates it because it probably means two overcards to his pair of something like that. Hence, if he gets to the turn, I doubt he's not showing down.

[Proofrock]

[ QUOTE ]
1. Check-calling is obviously +EV. BUT, it gains no possible fold equity at all.

2. Leading the flop gains a little in fold equity over check-calling. It is my belief that this little it gains will outweigh the very slight amount we lose if we get raised and have to pay two bets on the flop instead of one.


[/ QUOTE ]

I see. So how would I calculate the amount of fold equity I would need for this to be the best line? Is it something like this?

(I assume no more money goes in after the flop, that we only play to the turn, and that I have 12 outs to win; i figure this since I will win or lose the same amount from the turn onward, since i return to check-calling the turn)

check-call flop: 5*(12/47) - 1*(35/47) = 0.53 SB
lead flop and get called is the same as c-c = 0.53 SB
lead flop and get raised: 6*(12/47) - 2*(35/47) = 0.04 SB
lead flop and Villain folds: 4*1 = 4 SB.

In the worst case scenario he only raises or folds. In that case I want
4*p + 0.04(1-p) > 0.53, or 3.96p > 0.49, or p > 12%.

So I'd need Villain to fold more than 12% of the time for this to be better than check-calling, correct? So given the hand range I suggested (AA-QQ,AK,AQ), only QQ has any shot of folding, which represents 6/33 = 18% of holdings, so queens would need to fold roughly 2/3 of the time for leading the flop to be better than check-calling. (of course, if he has queens then I have at most 10 outs, so I'd have to re-evaluate, but this is the rough idea)

Have I done this calculation correctly? If not, please let me know where I've gone wrong so I can work it out more correctly.

-cj

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1. Check-calling is obviously +EV. BUT, it gains no possible fold equity at all.

2. Leading the flop gains a little in fold equity over check-calling. It is my belief that this little it gains will outweigh the very slight amount we lose if we get raised and have to pay two bets on the flop instead of one.


[/ QUOTE ]

I see. So how would I calculate the amount of fold equity I would need for this to be the best line? Is it something like this?

(I assume no more money goes in after the flop, that we only play to the turn, and that I have 12 outs to win; i figure this since I will win or lose the same amount from the turn onward, since i return to check-calling the turn)

check-call flop: 5*(12/47) - 1*(35/47) = 0.53 SB
lead flop and get called is the same as c-c = 0.53 SB
lead flop and get raised: 6*(12/47) - 2*(35/47) = 0.04 SB
lead flop and Villain folds: 4*1 = 4 SB.

In the worst case scenario he only raises or folds. In that case I want
4*p + 0.04(1-p) > 0.53, or 3.96p > 0.49, or p > 12%.

So I'd need Villain to fold more than 12% of the time for this to be better than check-calling, correct? So given the hand range I suggested (AA-QQ,AK,AQ), only QQ has any shot of folding, which represents 6/33 = 18% of holdings, so queens would need to fold roughly 2/3 of the time for leading the flop to be better than check-calling. (of course, if he has queens then I have at most 10 outs, so I'd have to re-evaluate, but this is the rough idea)

Have I done this calculation correctly? If not, please let me know where I've gone wrong so I can work it out more correctly.

-cj

[/ QUOTE ]

This looks vaguely right... but a better way to think about it is that you want villain to fold at least 1/8 as often as he raises... sometimes he will call. If you think he'll call 50% of the time, raise 40% of the time, and fold 10% of the time, leading the flop is still good... You get the idea though.