Hand vs Josh. / Sthief / Moderator of doom

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
on a somewhat related note, josh, if you were going to call the turn raise with a nonqueen pair what do you think about a turn 3bet/checkfold river line?

[/ QUOTE ]
Just saying non-queen pair is too vague IMO here. Many of Josh's non-queen pairs are strong enough to take to showdown here, so why forgo that EV? If you drew the line and said that pairs below X are not profitable to call the turn with, those would be the ones you'd want to bluff 3-bet with (I'd prefer a non-pocket pair though so you have more outs). I also like the turn 3-bet with a draw that can't win unimproved.

[/ QUOTE ]


read my response to his, because i think he and i are on the same page and i elaborated a little more.

my EV in this situation is a weighted average (weighted by his types of hands) of the cause and effect of each of my actions. the best play is the one that, on average, has the biggest upside over the rest. sometimes, of two completely different lines, one HAS to be better. say I 3-bet the turn. if he has a hand worth 4-betting, i have to fold but almost certainly (on this board especially) folded very few outs. this is no different from calling the turn and river. in each cause i lose 2, and i give up very little equity by folding the turn. so while getting to showdown and folding to a 4-bet are completely different (and i know i always preach GET TO SHOWDOWN), they will have the same net effect. the times he calls I'm usually beat but I still get to draw. my line is so weird that of the rare times I have him beat, he won't often bluff, so again, against a hand like TPTK that won't cap the turn, the net effect of raising vs calling is 0. the big advantage comes from the times he has a slightly better made hand and folds, or will fold a 6-outer rather than getting to check behind the river. I steal about 1/4 of the pot plus a bet I'd have to give up on the river to pay him off.

so as it turns out, while these are two drastically different lines, most of the time (90%+) it'll work out the same. the best decision comes from the times they won't be the same. in this case, 3-betting is worse when he will bluff the river or cap when I have outs. 3-betting is better when he has AK (and I have something like 62 for middle pair no kicker) or TT-77, A6, K6 and i dont have thoes beat

[dave44]

[ QUOTE ]
because i dont want him folding his weaker hands to a 3-bet. he is usually drawing dead to me. sometimes i miss value but a set is going 4 bets on the river unless it's a heart, 8, or 7 (definite drawback).

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a decent number of scare cards where your action isn't guaranteed.

[ QUOTE ]
sometimes he has AK and catches and bets instead of checking behind on the river (though id donk an A and maybe a K since he might not pay off a c/r with QJ, mgiht not value bet something like TT, and i get 3 bets from KQ

[/ QUOTE ]
Eh does he play AK this way that often?

[ QUOTE ]
sometimes he will river a set and give me action instead of him folding the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is good but its only happening 2/46.

Also, you don't take into account the times he semi-bluffs a draw on the turn and won't follow up with a river bet when he misses. Overall, it looks pretty close so if you give that metagame much credit I still like a turn 3-bet.

[TStoneMBD]

hi dave, if you were going to fold your pair to the raise then 3betting costs you 2 bets to bluff the opponent out of the pot. if you were going to call the turn raise 3betting only costs you 1 more bet to bluff the opponent out of the pot or 0 extra bets if you were going to call a river bet as well.

[dave44]

I did not take into consideration that using those 2 bets it would take to calldown will result in the same outcome most of the time if you raise, since I do agree he's very seldom capping the turn (although maybe he should be which is a whole different beast).

So, if 3-bet bluffing is a good play with your weak pair hands, should that change whether you should 3-bet a draw here? We don't want to be bluffing too much or he's not gonna be folding those middle pairs.

Also, I think its worth pointing out that this whole notion of 3-betting a weak pair in this spot is reminiscent of complaints people had of DERB's game.

[flawless_victory]

[ QUOTE ]
87

thoughts on turn play? thoughts on river c/r attempt? I like a c/r in general but that's a bad card.

[/ QUOTE ]
OMG, threebet the turn. jesus.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
So, if 3-bet bluffing is a good play with your weak pair hands, should that change whether you should 3-bet a draw here? We don't want to be bluffing too much or he's not gonna be folding those middle pairs.

[/ QUOTE ]


no, calling the turn and folding the river is more profitable for draws. the difference with a weak made hand is that I plan to put in 2 more bets after I am raised. I am just changing the way in which I put those bets in the pot. with a draw I'd like 1 and only 1 if I miss.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
87

thoughts on turn play? thoughts on river c/r attempt? I like a c/r in general but that's a bad card.

[/ QUOTE ]
OMG, threebet the turn. jesus.

[/ QUOTE ]


few points

1. he's not taking a free showdown that often, and if he is, he would probably have folded to a 3-bet anyway. the big disadvantage to waiting is that sometimes the river is the 6h and I miss 2 bets, but that's only when he would've called a 3-bet and river bet, but wouldn't value bet after raising the turn, which is rare.
2. the majority of 3-betting hands will bet the river and that works out to the same
3. the big advantage to waiting is that there are some hands that he will fold to a 3-bet, but instead bet the river with, like JJ-77. a secondary advantage is when he's raising AK or AJ and spikes on the river I make 1 or 2 extra bets

if all these things are true, waiting has to be better doesn't it? so which of these things don't you agree with?

[flawless_victory]

youre playing SH LHE w/ an agg plyr.
u have the nuts.
for the love of god dont slow him down... let him cap it! let him give u action... u hit gin in HU pot after semibluffing the flop, just keep bet/raising.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
youre playing SH LHE w/ an agg plyr.
u have the nuts.
for the love of god dont slow him down... let him cap it! let him give u action... u hit gin in HU pot after semibluffing the flop, just keep bet/raising.

[/ QUOTE ]


in general i think you have a good philosophy. raise and call a lot because theyre aggressive and bet a lot because theyre loose. dont think too deeply because 99% of situations are simple and overthinking leads to bad play. you have the nuts. raise.

but i think here i should wait. if he has a hand, i dont lose action. i c/r the river and he will 3-bet anyway. if he has a set i get the same amoutn of bets. not to look too mcuh into results, but the fact that he said he would automuck to a 3-bet holding TT, right or wrong, makes waiting look more appealing.

[flawless_victory]

ya, well it looks like you know your man and are def thinking, so i might have to trust u... but i find two things a bit shocking...
- he will autofold TT for three on turn here
- he will not cap turn w/ a set
that is not typical behavior of online TAGS on either acct.