TDL 2-7: checkraising when a card ahead

[randomstumbl]

After playing a lot of TDL lately, I've started seeing this a lot. I have no clue why people think this is a good idea. Any thoughts are appreciated.

On the first draw player A draws 2 OOP; Player B draws 3. Then, A attempts to checkraise. A will always have an okay pat hand (87543, 96432, 86432).

This is so easy to play against. In 3-4 hours of play, I fell for this 1 out of 5 times. When I actually "fell" for it, I had 7652 with a 2 and 6 discarded. Even then, I realized I needed to take a break if I was walking into something that obvious.

So, is this just a stupid play by otherwise okay players? Am I missing some hidden value to this? Do other people walk into the checkraise more often?

[MarkGritter]

[ QUOTE ]
After playing a lot of TDL lately, I've started seeing this a lot. I have no clue why people think this is a good idea. Any thoughts are appreciated.

On the first draw player A draws 2 OOP; Player B draws 3. Then, A attempts to checkraise. A will always have an okay pat hand (87543, 96432, 86432).

This is so easy to play against. In 3-4 hours of play, I fell for this 1 out of 5 times. When I actually "fell" for it, I had 7652 with a 2 and 6 discarded. Even then, I realized I needed to take a break if I was walking into something that obvious.

So, is this just a stupid play by otherwise okay players? Am I missing some hidden value to this? Do other people walk into the checkraise more often?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to admit I will sometimes bet here when improving to a 1-card draw if I have position. (i.e., try to steal with 27xxx on the button, make a 1-card 7 draw, villian draws 2 from the BB and checks.)

I think the numbers I worked out here are than something like 45%+ of the time in this situation I am ahead, <10% of the time Villian has a pat hand, and 45%+ he also has a 1 card draw, but his check-raise is foolish in this case.

So I will happily bet and risk the check-raise because drawing two to a worthwhile pat hand is the least likely scenario by far. (I would love it if villian does this with a T.)

OTOH, Villian's strategy seems quite foolish since the most likely case is a 1-card improvement and the hand gets checked through.

Let me try some back-of-the-envelope calculations here (which obviously have some flaws):

If Hero has a 1-card draw and is 40% to make his hand, then Villian gets 0.60 from a bet here and 1.20 from a check-raise.

If Hero has a 2-card draw and is only 20% to make his hand, then Villian gets 0.80 from a bet here and 0.00 from a check. (Maybe more from the bet because Hero might fold something like 256 or 278.)

If Hero still has a 3-card draw and is only 10% to make his hand, then Villian gets 0.90 from a bet (or else picks up the presumable 2 SB already in the pot.)

If Hero is pat, the situation is much more complicated. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

If the only options were a 1-card and 2-card draw, Hero needs to make a 1-card draw and bet 60% of the time for the C/R to be profitable, which is absurd. Adding in the other possibilities makes the C/R even more costly.

However, the "missing value" may be those players who love to bet in position whether they are behind or improved or what. Recently I was playing with a guy like this--- we both drew 1, I check, he bets. We both drew 1 again. I check, he bets. We both draw 1 on the last draw. He's been drawing to an 87 while I've been drawing to a 7. Heck, I even saw him put in the bet when behind and OOP (he drew 2, I drew 1, he bet, I raised, he called and drew 1.) Against such an opponent going for the check-raise probably has much more value.

[randomstumbl]

[ QUOTE ]
If Hero has a 1-card draw...

[/ QUOTE ]
When I say that they always do this with a pat hand, I mean they always do it with a pat hand and never anything else.

I think that's what makes the play so terrible. I had a great one card draw and I was still thinking about how big of a mistake my bet was.

I kept thinking that you're giving away too much information. If you want to also check your worst two card draws when you brick, this move looks better.

[ QUOTE ]
However, the "missing value" may be those players who love to bet in position whether they are behind or improved or what.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's very obvious to me that anyone who checks in this situation is either terrible or trying to check-raise. I think this is a situation where what I think is obvious was not so obvious 5 minutes before I realized it.

[timprov]

I quite happily bet-three-bet an 8-out 7 draw or 12-out 8 draw in this spot, and check behind anything worse. Pretty soon I stopped getting it pulled on me.

Note that if Hero (as Mark's using it to mean you, not the c/r donk) will bet any one-card draw or pat hand, and check behind with any two-card draw, checking's not really all that bad. Especially with a rough hand, the OOP player gains a ton of information which he can use to decide whether to keep his bad pat hand or not. If Hero is drawing two, he won't be able to call a bet on the next round unless he improves to a pat hand. Since he would have called on the second round anyway, it's pretty much a wash if it checks through, providing he won't do it with a 1-card draw. Since that seems pretty standard, I think it's not really such a bad play.

[randomstumbl]

[ QUOTE ]
I quite happily bet-three-bet an 8-out 7 draw or 12-out 8 draw in this spot, and check behind anything worse. Pretty soon I stopped getting it pulled on me.

[/ QUOTE ] I think a fair amount of the time given my read, you'd only have 8 outs here (an 87 may or may not take it down). Honestly, I'm surprised that I don't know how many outs I need to be a money favorite. It's gotta be more than 12 though with 2 draws.

[ QUOTE ]

Note that if Hero (as Mark's using it to mean you, not the c/r donk) will bet any one-card draw or pat hand, and check behind with any two-card draw, checking's not really all that bad. Especially with a rough hand, the OOP player gains a ton of information which he can use to decide whether to keep his bad pat hand or not. If Hero is drawing two, he won't be able to call a bet on the next round unless he improves to a pat hand. Since he would have called on the second round anyway, it's pretty much a wash if it checks through, providing he won't do it with a 1-card draw. Since that seems pretty standard, I think it's not really such a bad play.

[/ QUOTE ] This might explain a lot of why three card draws are working so well against them. Just think of all the free cards that you're giving out here. If you do this, I can win the pot by stealing your blind or I get two draws to make a decent hand if you brick. And all for the price of two small bets.

[timprov]

Admittedly, if they do it with a real hand, which occasionally does happen, I'm completely hosed. It's almost always a 9 or worse, though, and most of the time if I'm pat it's with a better hand than theirs. And of course, the three-bet does get them to break a lot of the time. The real key is putting them to difficult decisions.

It's hard to make a good hand from a three-card draw, especially without improving twice on the first draw. I doubt they'd be worth stealing blinds with if you didn't have position and the ability to stay pat with a bustbeater while the villain is still drawing. Against a pat hand this is essentially nullified -- you're not likely to continue if you catch JT on the second draw, for instance, while that would be a nice place to be if your opponent was still drawing.

[randomstumbl]

[ QUOTE ]

Admittedly, if they do it with a real hand, which occasionally does happen, I'm completely hosed. It's almost always a 9 or worse, though, and most of the time if I'm pat it's with a better hand than theirs. And of course, the three-bet does get them to break a lot of the time. The real key is putting them to difficult decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the opponents we're playing are just different. If they only do it with a 96 or better, it's just bad because it's predicatable.

If they're doing it with bad 9's, it's even worse. I can't think of a worse situation to look for a check-raise. And I can't think of a worse play than check-raising and breaking your hand.

TDL is fun because you can look at a play and just point out how incredibly stupid it is using very basic game theory.