#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
Hey Jfresh,
My understanding is that the turn card changes lots of things. Firstly, hands that were calling us down may now fold because of the scare card, so we lose some equity on value-bets. Secondly, villain will often try to bluff or semibluff raise us because we represented a pair on the flop which will usually not have an A in the hand b/c we flatcalled preflop. However, we don't particularly relish the thought of calling down a raise. So, we check. Aggressive players will rarely take the free card even with a flush draw, because of our blatant show of weakness. If they do, and we check the river, they will often bluff at the river with a missed draw which makes up somewhat for the free card. Also, hands liek small PPs that may have folded the turn may bet it to take a free showdown, while drawing to only 2 outs. In your example (JT on T62A board) the same line applies. The only hand that has 2 overcards to us is KQo, which has 9 outs to win. Any other is either reverse dominated (KJ) or only has 1 overcard (Q9) so a free card is again not very risky. Surf |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
How about check/call turn, bet/fold river? Get bluffraised too often? He has unpaired cards too often? He doesn't pay off enough? Check/calling the river after check/calling turn just seems like throwing a BB at him and seeing if he catches it.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
[ QUOTE ]
bringing up a pretty old thread. everyone is advocating check calling the turn here, is it partly because there aren't really any overcards that can hurt us now, because of KQ? same opponent, you have JT, flop is T63, turn A... check or bet turn? if you bet, and get raised, do you always call down an aggressive opponent? [/ QUOTE ] When you are OOP against an aggressive player and a scare card hits on the turn, then act scared. They love to bet at you and once they bet the turn as a bluff most will have a hard time not bluffing again on the river. I don't think it really matters how many overcards remain to your pair when employing this strategy. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
I can't fold to a turn raise for the same reasons i can't fold to a river bet - he is aggressive and prone to bluffing...but I don't think there's much value in a river bet because much of the reason it's okay to call the river is beacuse hands that would fold otherwise will try to bluff me off of a hand, no? It's a tough situation, this one.
Surf |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
[ QUOTE ]
check/call turn and river [/ QUOTE ] This is exactly what I've been trying to incorporate into my game lately. I agree this is the right play yet I am having a hard time not betting in spots like this. I think I will be a much better player when I can get these plays into my game. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
hey surf
i went back and read a bunch of your blind defense hands and found them very interesting. i had been check calling the turn when an ace hit, and it just felt weak. i know lags don't sense if we go into checkcall/showdown mode, but for the thinkers, can't they just value bet us with impunity now, and check through if they didn't hit their ace, cause they know we are going to showdown? questions are kind of basic, just trying to retool my understanding of 10/20 cuz my 5/10 background is definitely not working for me. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
Yeah I guess I'm thinking he won't bluff too often since it looks clear you're going to SD after calling the turn. Not that he still won't sometimes, but at a lesser frequency. And he'll probably call a bet with Qx or 9x or a PP. I guess he might also bluffraise you sometimes which is worrisome. I'm not sure...3-betting PF makes it much easier. A check/call would be a lot clearer with Q8.
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
Out of curiosity, was there a reason you didn't 3-bet pre-flop? I would pretty much always do it with such a strong holding, and reading everyone's responses that seems to be the general consensus. But I guess I could see against someone who is prone to bluffing too much trying to trap them, as one of the other posters suggested. Still though, it seems like 3-betting you get your money in while you're ahead, and from a meta-game perspective it's got to discourage people from taking shots at your blinds to 3-bet when you've got the cards, right?
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
Hey jfresh,
try check-calling the A when you actually hit it sometimes, too. you'll be amazed what type of junk they bet at you, stuff they'd never dream of calling with. Gotta keep your play a little more balanced even at 10/20...if you only check-call when an A hits when you've got a mediocre pair you will be open to value-betting...but they would have value-raised you anyway so you've got to mix it up a bit. Surf |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20: blind defense part 2 - KQs
I don't remember this specific hand/opponent, but if I didn't 3bet preflop it was because one or more of these factors were present:
1) I didn't think I was a big enough favorite preflop equity-wise 2) I figured to get paid off more when I hit because 3) Villain is tenacious postflop and hard to fold out even when he misses 4) Villain likes to bluff/semibluff raise even after being 3bet preflop, and on semi-dangerous boards. Surf |
|
|