Preflop bluff turns into money by the river

[ZootMurph]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Finally, The one thing I hate on these forums that I see ocassionally is that people post in a thread "Bad call on the river". That's it. No explanation as to why they think that, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to be nitpicky.... but this is a common complaint voiced frequently.... but usually in threads that deserve them. You've gotten nothing but well-reasoned responses here.

As for your hand analysis...

I will continue to maintain that initiative or no initiative your 3-bet was bad. You're ignoring the sometimes villain has a made hand. Or chooses this opportunity to bluff. Or the times that, shockingly, one of your opponents behind you has a hand!

And then, you follow it up with a terrible bet. The guy behind you just called 3 cold. What is he calling 3 cold with that he's folding here? Shockingly, he just calls.

Then, on the turn, you bet again. You think c/call and bet are the same... except for the fact that your opponents often, even EVERY time, have another option available to them: raise. And you can't fold, but you certainly don't have equity to put in two bets on the turn headsup when you're behind.

That your opponent played this like an even bigger donk is the subtler form of revisionist thinking you're undergoing here. He should have raised you on every street.


At least you got the river right.

[/ QUOTE ]

ErrantNight. I understand that's a common complaint. However, you are wrong in saying that all the responses here are well-reasoned. Look at the very first response. [ QUOTE ]
With your description of Button, preflop is pretty horrible here.

[/ QUOTE ] I see neither reasoning nor anything that is remotely discussable here. Also, what about the flop, turn, river? Anything? Just because someone thinks I shouldn't have played preflop doesn't mean you should discount the rest. It happened, tell me if you think it was good or bad, and why. That's all I, or all those other that have complained, are asking.

And, I'm not ignoring that sometimes he has a hand. I'm saying that even with a hand he will get a flop he doesn't like, and may fold. Let's just say he raised with JJ. Well, when the King flops, will he call down when I three bet him preflop? Probably not. But maybe. Anyway, I have position and will get away relatively cheap if he continues past the flop. Finally, he didn't cap preflop, so most made hands are probably out at this point. He could have a King, and I'd find out on my flop bet if he does. In any case, the times he has a hand are cancelled out by the times I have a big flop. If the flop is 663 or 345, he will call down with AA, or better still, start a raising war with me. So, again, the extreme cases (him having a made hand and me hitting a huge flop) basically cancel each other out. For the record, if it got headsup and he capped preflop, it would be easy to get out for the 2BB I was expecting to gamble with unless I hit a huge flop. If he doesn't cap, I'm certain he doesn't have a pair or a small pair which can fold without hitting the flop. Again, leaving me a 2:1 favorite in the hand and still only costing me 2BB.

The flop bet I agree was bad. Really, that was the crux of this hand for me. A really tight player calls a three bet preflop, and I bet into him on a board with two broadway cards with 7 high. Ugly. Before I go on... I agree it was bad. There was a nice pot and the only chance I had to take it down was to bet. 1 bet to win 10.5. My folding equity probably wasn't that good, but I made a mistake and didn't think about it at the time.

On the turn... raise wasn't an option here. Period. I never saw this player raise. Ever. Over 500 hands. With that information, I feel that check/call and bet are the same. If you look at his holding, you will see my read was spot on with regard to his ability to raise (he may even be a bad attempt at a 'bot, the way he played).

Finally, I agree that he should have capped the flop and raised every street. I would have been forced to check fold the flop if he'd done that.

[ErrantNight]

you've got some serious learning to do.

and you're so hyper-focused on one or two comments that should be so obvious they don't NEED further discussion that, by your own admission, you DIDN'T EVEN READ THE WHOLE THREAD before making up your mind about the type of responses you were getting!

[ QUOTE ]
Let's just say he raised with JJ. Well, when the King flops, will he call down when I three bet him preflop? Probably not. But maybe.

[/ QUOTE ]

ridiculous. why must you have a K? why will he fold against a single, non-A overcard?

[ QUOTE ]
On the turn... raise wasn't an option here. Period. I never saw this player raise. Ever. Over 500 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is complete and utter b.s. Whether it's true or not. Either you have this information, or you don't. Not providing it until you've decided you can't be right unless incredibly specific, incredibly obviously important information, which has previously been known ONLY TO YOU has been the source of some of the worst threads on this board. Like historically terrible posts where people make bad plays, justify them ex post facto, and provide reads and information sporadically as people detail why their play was bad, ultimately "proving" how correct they really were, every step of the way. If only the rest of us would open our minds.

If you're educating us, make it clear in your o.p.

If you're making a string of opponent specific moves that really won't ever be applicable ever, outside of this hand, consider not posting. But if you feel the need to post, explain in your o.p. why you went that route.

[ZootMurph]

[ QUOTE ]
you've got some serious learning to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

A little childish, wouldn't you say? And yes, I'm responding to a condescending post with one of my own.

[ QUOTE ]

and you're so hyper-focused on one or two comments that should be so obvious they don't NEED further discussion that, by your own admission, you DIDN'T EVEN READ THE WHOLE THREAD before making up your mind about the type of responses you were getting!

[ QUOTE ]
Let's just say he raised with JJ. Well, when the King flops, will he call down when I three bet him preflop? Probably not. But maybe.

[/ QUOTE ]

ridiculous. why must you have a K? why will he fold against a single, non-A overcard?


[/ QUOTE ]

Why? Because that is my read on him. If you post a hand and say a player is tight aggressive, do I need to ask you why? I saw him lay down a lot after the flop, what more do you want me to tell you? Just because you don't like the read, doesn't mean it is wrong. Again, in this particular case, he folded just as I expected him to do 2 times out of 3. I don't how to argue my side of this discussion... a read is a read. There is no way to validate it except by results. My results here validated my read. I don't understand why this bothers you so much.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
On the turn... raise wasn't an option here. Period. I never saw this player raise. Ever. Over 500 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is complete and utter b.s. Whether it's true or not. Either you have this information, or you don't. Not providing it until you've decided you can't be right unless incredibly specific, incredibly obviously important information, which has previously been known ONLY TO YOU has been the source of some of the worst threads on this board.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another angry listener. Please read my initial post. The second sentence in the initial paragraph states: Button is a classic calling station. NEVER raises, just calls. He only bets with a big hand when checked to, otherwise you can be sure he will call with something and fold with nothing.

My read on him was CLEARLY posted. Why you are getting all huffy about this, again, I don't know. How did I manage to piss you off here?

[ QUOTE ]
Like historically terrible posts where people make bad plays, justify them ex post facto, and provide reads and information sporadically as people detail why their play was bad, ultimately "proving" how correct they really were, every step of the way. If only the rest of us would open our minds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't give all information in my initial post. Some things I didn't think were important. Am I the first to do this? No, I'm not. In any case, I'm really sorry you have nothing to contribute to this thread, except to blast me because you disagree with me. This is really becoming a sorry excuse for a post. If you'd like, I'll start posting all my hands where AA gets busted and ask if I played it badly. Nice and standard, just the way you like it.


[ QUOTE ]
If you're educating us, make it clear in your o.p.

If you're making a string of opponent specific moves that really won't ever be applicable ever, outside of this hand, consider not posting. But if you feel the need to post, explain in your o.p. why you went that route.

[/ QUOTE ]

For the last time... the point of this post was twofold. First, to find out how others vary there play and see if they agreed with mine. Second, to find out if my play was OK postflop. I have been shown that I was wrong in betting into the calling station postflop. It was not a great decision. Would I do it next time? No, it was definitely -EV. So, if nothing else, I did learn something from the post, as I'd hoped to. Isn't that what this forum is all about?

[ErrantNight]

i think we've hashed out most of our issues. but if you think this lag will lay down a big pocket pair against single overcards because he's made lots of laydowns before postflop i think you're very wrong. but whatever.

well, that, and the fact that whatever my tone (and whatever tone i perceived that led me to respond in such a tone)... i have offered numerous specific, well-reasoned points as to why your preflop play, and play on the first two streets, was very, very wrong. if you'd like to pretend like that didn't happen, fine, i really don't care anymore. if you'd like to believe your only mistake was betting the flop against a calling station, fine.

g'luck, and peace.