Preflop bluff turns into money by the river

[punkass]

"Varying play" is now the excuse for "bad play". Bad players use it more often than good players. The thing is, varying play only helps when the other people at your table notice what you are doing, which is almost not the case is an online 2/4 table.

Congrats on your win. You asked for critique, you got it.

[ZootMurph]

I haven't read all the responses here. However, it seems that some people are taking what I'm saying personally.

So, first, I want to apologize to anyone who's feelings I hurt or who thinks I am in any way being less than cordial.

Secondly, I want to thank everyone that replied. I, as well as I'm sure everyone in this forum, can appreciate (with numbers to back it up), the value of all in these forums. When I started reading and posting here, I was a losing player. I thought if I had a K, it was a great hand and I should play it, whatever the kicker. LOL... the good old days! But, I'm a winning player now and it is thanks in LARGE part to reading, posting, and advice in these forums. So, I REALLY REALLY do appreciate any and all input. The fact that I disagree ocassionally doesn't mean it isn't appreciated.

Next, I'm going to try to fully explain my opinion on everything that anyone may question or dislike here. If you disagree with me, that is what these forums are all about. I'll happily discuss the hand and my theories.

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. That is a waste of everyone's time, in my opinion. Discussing a hand or a decision means saying why you think what you do. Just saying bad call on the river doesn't say why you think it is a bad call, so there can be no discussion on the issue. So, again, I really do appreciate all posts where someone takes the time to back their opinion with some reasoning so it can be discussed.

So, here we go. As I explained in an earlier post, what I'm looking for in posting this thread is thoughts on my play. All of it, not just preflop. I appreciate any and all who took the time to give me advice and explain their reasoning on any part of the hand.

Because of the LAGgishness of the preflop raiser, and the tightness of the known players behind me (Button and BB specifically), I felt this was a good opportunity to isolate a LAG who shows weakness postflop. Since a non paired starting hand will whiff 2 out of 3 times, I felt like I would be a 2:1 favorite postflop. In addition, because of the relatively small chance that one of the 4 players still behind me (I was MP3 here), would have a hand that could call the 3 bet, I felt the isolation play had about a 90% chance of success. Let it be noted that, after some number crunching, I was way off on the 90% that I estimated. As long as I was at least a 2:1 favorite to get all 4 players behind me to fold, I would still make this play. Finally, I thought my table image at this point would help my play. So, I had a little bit of a hand, and a great situation. I 3 bet preflop thinking I have a good chance of folding those behind me and isolating MP2, with a good chance of winning the hand on the flop. I felt at the time, and still feel, that this is a +EV play for this situation.

On the flop, with 10 bets in the pot, I am checked to. I feel I have some small amount of folding equity... very little thanks to the King and 2 spades on the flop. But, I follow through with the plan. As expected, MP2 folds. Unfortunately, Button has a hand. Oh well, I lost 2 BB on this hand.

Turn gives me new life. As discussed, I bet. Kailla says I should check/call here with no real folding equity. I think either play gives the same result, the only difference is the 1% chance that I MAY have folding equity here.

River is the easiest part of this hand. Board isn't paired, and I haven't seen Button chase flush draws. Finally, he may be afraid of a flush draw, so will not bet behind me. Since, I can't put him on the flush, I bet. Even if he had the flush, I don't think he'll raise and I still would have to call a bet if I checked. Betting, IMO, is the best play here and it isn't even close.

As to the results. There are two different results that I think should be part of this discussion. The hand results and the loose calls and extra action I got after this hand at this table. I think the extra action I got shows that people pay attention, and that it means something not only to vary play, wherever in the hand you think you should do it, but also to show down a bluff or two early at a table. In any case, the seats behind me were tight before this hand, but they did a bit more coldcalling and playing against me after this hand. So, getting to show down the 76s that I three bet with was the best advertising I could have had. It would have been worth it if I'd completely whiffed the whole hand and showed it down.

As for the hand results, for those who care (I usually don't when I'm reading other's threads), I will post Button's hand in white on the next line.
<font color="white"> Button had KK for a set of Kings. I agree that I was very, very lucky. </font>

[ZootMurph]

Reading back I see a lot of replies that don't take into consideration anything I've posted with regard to why I believe the preflop raise was +EV.

So, instead of replying individually to any before my last response, I will instead reply to any after that response that have some 'discussable' information in them.

If I seem condescending in what I have to say next, you are right, I am being condescending:

A post like that which I quote below is, again, a waste of everyone's time, including the person typing it. Why bother? If you have no useful information on the hand itself, or on the reasoning, or on the numbers, then why bother? To show how 'superior' you are because you know something no one else does? This is the kind of thing that really ruins forums like this, in my opinion. If you have no criticism that can be discussed, don't bother!

[ QUOTE ]
"Varying play" is now the excuse for "bad play". Bad players use it more often than good players. The thing is, varying play only helps when the other people at your table notice what you are doing, which is almost not the case is an online 2/4 table.

Congrats on your win. You asked for critique, you got it.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ErrantNight]

[ 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.

[Catt]

OK, I'll throw in a minumum of reasoning to my previous post.

Your statement: "My whole idea was that you miss the flop 2 out of 3 times, and knowing he will fold any flop he misses, I will win a nice pot 2 out of 3 times. So, I'm going into the hand as a 2:1 favorite against him" is pretty ridiculous. First, you're only taking into account unpaired hands hitting a pair on the flop; second, you're not accounting for flopping a draw; third, you can't be certain he folds on the flop in a big pot for one bet - your read just isn't that strong; fourth, this hypothetical action actually contradicts your given read "MP2 is a LAG preflop(47%/31%), but very rarely shows down hands, either folding after the turn with nothing or jamming the pot" -- but he'll now fold for one bet on the flop?; fifth, there are four people to act behind you, including one "classic calling station;" sixth, despite flopping NOTHING you are betting into the calling station and the LAG who likes to see the river; seventh, if you think you have adequate responses to all these points, then please explain to me why 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] is a better hand to this with than 72o -- the bulk of your +EV argument is essentially stealing a pot by investing at minimum 2BBs.

Lastly, nice apology; however, in the future when someone criticizes a play, responding with, in effect, "am I the only good player here who varies his play or is everyone else a robotic ABCer?" is not the best way to win friends and influence people. Good luck.

[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.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Finally, I disagree with you about varying preflop play. I think that is a very common error. If I do nothing but 3 bet with AA, KK, QQ, and AK, then I won't get a whole lot of action postflop. Your preflop play sets up your postflop action, and therefore is just as important, in my opinion, as the rest of the hand. Therefore, varying it is also just as important.

[/ QUOTE ]
This couldn't be less true at the Party 2/4.

[/ QUOTE ]

Word.

[ellipse_87]

[ QUOTE ]
this is one of those situations. Slightly -EV immediately, definitely +EV long term

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I just had some bad luck that button picked up a big hand. I estimate that the preflop play will work over 67% of the time in the situation presented, making the preflop play fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're arguing in circles and wasting everyone's time.

This hand is not worth 40+ posts. You've admitted (before contradicting yourself) that the play was -EV short term. There's only a disagreement about whether there's any advertising value at Party 2/4--that's really kind of a binary operation and not amenable to subtle analysis. If you've been getting good results, fine, go nuts.

The animosity was ignited by you implicitly calling one of the best posters in this forum an automaton. Take a day off, come back and play nice, everything will be fine.

[ZootMurph]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, I'll throw in a minumum of reasoning to my previous post.

Your statement: "My whole idea was that you miss the flop 2 out of 3 times, and knowing he will fold any flop he misses, I will win a nice pot 2 out of 3 times. So, I'm going into the hand as a 2:1 favorite against him" is pretty ridiculous. First, you're only taking into account unpaired hands hitting a pair on the flop; second, you're not accounting for flopping a draw; third, you can't be certain he folds on the flop in a big pot for one bet - your read just isn't that strong; fourth, this hypothetical action actually contradicts your given read "MP2 is a LAG preflop(47%/31%), but very rarely shows down hands, either folding after the turn with nothing or jamming the pot" -- but he'll now fold for one bet on the flop?; fifth, there are four people to act behind you, including one "classic calling station;" sixth, despite flopping NOTHING you are betting into the calling station and the LAG who likes to see the river; seventh, if you think you have adequate responses to all these points, then please explain to me why 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] is a better hand to this with than 72o -- the bulk of your +EV argument is essentially stealing a pot by investing at minimum 2BBs.

Lastly, nice apology; however, in the future when someone criticizes a play, responding with, in effect, "am I the only good player here who varies his play or is everyone else a robotic ABCer?" is not the best way to win friends and influence people. Good luck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Catt... I agree with you that I didn't take into account his hitting a draw. I did account for big pairs, and I did believe my read was that strong. Unfortunately, I can't give you any basis for my read, as we all get reads on players based on what we see. The only way I can verify my read is the flop action, where I bet and he folds. Also, as I said to ErrantNight... there are going to be times when I hit a big flop too. These cancel out the times he has a big hand. Further, since I don't know what he was holding, I think I have just as good a chance as he did to flop a big draw as well, so I would have to guess that the times he flops a draw and I flop a draw cancel each other too. My hand in this case is simply a draw oriented hand, which probably gives me a better chance at flopping a draw than MP2's holding. But, I'm fine with calling it even for the sake of this discussion.

As for the way MP2 was playing. I looked at his stats, and he shows down a lot, 53% of the time. It was just a read I had from watching him at this table. Maybe he was having a bad day and getting into the frame of mind where every hand is a loser... I don't know. I just know that, at this table, on this day, he seemed to be folding a LOT on the flop after raising preflop. Again, as for reads... all I can say is we all have reads on players... if we don't trust our reads, then we can't maximize situations that occur on the table as we are playing.

Unfortunately, there isn't much to be able to discuss or argue with when talking about reads. Most of your arguments are on my reads. I have to trust my reads, whatever the numbers may be saying. I can't tell you that you are wrong, just like you telling me my read was wrong cannot be realistic, since you were not there. Basically, the first thing you have to do when going through someone else's hand is look at their reads and base your responses to them. Questioning them doesn't change the way the hand played out, because the player posting the hand played the hand based on their read. So you, too, should be basing your criticism of the hand on the read given. Finally, I think the result (the LAG in MP2 folded the flop with two Broadway cards showing), verifies my read more than anything else could.

I really can't answer anything about your fifth point. I don't really understand it. My definition of a calling station and yours may be different. To me a calling station is someone that, ONCE IN A HAND, will not let go of the hand IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING AT ALL. So, a calling station can fold A2 preflop, but can't fold A2 postflop if the flop contains a 2, or 34, 35, or 45. My definition of someone being a calling station doesn't influence preflop decisions, in general.

As I said to ErrantNight, I agree with your sixth point. It was dumb betting into the tight calling station postflop.

As for your seventh point. 76s is not better than 72o for the situation, except that it is intrinsically a better hand. So, this play would be even better with AA... but then it wouldn't be considered to be making a play, just standard stuff. The truth of the matter is that I wouldn't make that play with 72o. I feel that part of the value of the play is the hand itself. VERY VERY little. But the hand offsets possibilities which affect the numbers. If I did this with 72o, then my chances of flopping something worth fighting with would be miniscule, and therefore would not offset some of the possibilities of MP2s hand, like flopping a draw or having a big pair. Whereas 76s has many possibilities itself that will offset the extremes for MP2. I don't know exactly what you were looking for with your seventh point, but I hope I answered it. If not, I look forward to further discussion about it.

Finally, I didn't say "GOOD" player... I said [ QUOTE ]
... is there anyone out there besides me who isn't an automaton?

[/ QUOTE ] To me, this doesn't infer superiority. I think all posters here are better than average players. The majority are better than me, without question. However, part of any player's game, in my estimation, is varying your game. All those who think no one pays attention really have a long way to go in getting better, simply because they have to overcome preconceived notions that EVERYONE is a fish because they play online, play at Party Poker, play 2/4, etc. And, at the time I posted this, I was wondering if anyone besides me actually varied their game. I know we've all read HEPFAP, and it is clearly talked about in that book, as well as several others. But we don't see many non standard plays here to help us understand when we find a situation to make one of these plays. Further, any time there is a nonstandard play posted, everyone posts the standard response (don't 3 bet the preflop with 76s). Unfortunately, in this specific instance, I really didn't put enough information in my initial post, and that threw some things off. Follow that up with Entity getting pissed over my responses just threw this whole thread out of line. Some of the fault is, without question, mine. That's why I apologized.