Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Micro-Limits

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-11-2005, 09:21 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

Shillx, are we really afraid of the straight here? Would BB 3-bet PF with 98, 43, or 83? It seems like AK, A7-A5 or 77-55 are the culprits here ... maybe even your A8 hand. (Tough to 3 bet the field OOP with 77-55 though, no?)

If we're afraid of these, why not raise the turn here to test the waters?

Worst-case is that BB 3-bets the turn, we call for the straight & fold to a bet if we miss assuming the baby set or better A-kicker. But, in this case, we're no worse off than the hand as you've laid it out.

We could win if the villain has KK, QQ.

We could earn a call on the turn & check on the river (which we could take or not), saving a bet if we're beat.

No?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-11-2005, 10:53 AM
fizzleboink fizzleboink is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: to your left
Posts: 125
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

Here's my take on Shillx's example.

I think BB would only 3-bet PF with AA-TT and AK. The 3-bet the flop on tells me he has an overpair and not AK. On the turn you now beat KK-TT, putting yourself as a huge favorite to win the hand. However, if you raise the turn he will probably fold KK-TT right there. So you smooth call and let him bet out on the river, and raise him there. He 3-bets again, which tells you he can beat your pair of aces because the river card doesn't change anything. So I think the BB has AA and that is that.

Am I way off?

Edit: fixed a couple typos
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-11-2005, 11:02 AM
car ramrod car ramrod is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

I agree with Fizzle's thinking. AA
still don't think I would have played it this way.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-11-2005, 11:23 AM
deception5 deception5 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 59
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

You call because it's heads up, you have a monster which the bb probably doesn't give you credit for, the pot is small, and it's extremely likely the villian has a better hand. He's aggressive and either bluffing or semi-bluffing so you want to squeeze some extra bet out of him.

If you raise you allow him to get away cheaply.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-11-2005, 11:29 AM
deception5 deception5 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 59
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

Your reasoning is good but I think you're missing a few hands from the initial range. I could see BB 3-betting here against this many opponents with a few high suited connectors like AQs/KQs, maybe even QJs. But after the rainbow low card flop these hands would all be removed from my list as well.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-11-2005, 11:48 AM
fizzleboink fizzleboink is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: to your left
Posts: 125
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

[ QUOTE ]
I could see BB 3-betting here against this many opponents with a few high suited connectors like AQs/KQs, maybe even QJs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? But you'll be out of position for the rest of the hand.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-11-2005, 12:25 PM
deception5 deception5 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 59
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

[ QUOTE ]
Really? But you'll be out of position for the rest of the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup, the position would be bad. But against 5 players you have huge equity with these hands as they have high card/suited/connected strength.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-11-2005, 12:36 PM
deception5 deception5 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 59
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

Interestingly I just ran this through pokerstove. I think calling and check/raising a favorable flop might be a better play for those hands against a tight raiser or even a tag. We have an edge but not a huge one.

Against a tight raiser

514,834 games 18.631 secs 27,633 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 29.0121 % 27.63% 01.42% { QQ+, AJs+, AQo+ }
Hand 2: 19.1182 % 17.74% 01.40% { AQs, KQs, QJs }
Hand 3: 13.0405 % 12.29% 00.77% { random }
Hand 4: 12.9272 % 12.17% 00.78% { random }
Hand 5: 12.9810 % 12.24% 00.76% { random }
Hand 6: 12.9211 % 12.17% 00.77% { random }


Against a TAG

277,015 games 9.081 secs 30,504 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 25.2939 % 23.92% 01.37% { 99+, ATs+, KJs+, AJo+, KQo }
Hand 2: 21.7295 % 20.30% 01.42% { AQs, KQs, QJs }
Hand 3: 13.2050 % 12.39% 00.81% { random }
Hand 4: 13.2257 % 12.41% 00.82% { random }
Hand 5: 13.2817 % 12.48% 00.80% { random }
Hand 6: 13.2642 % 12.47% 00.80% { random }
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-11-2005, 12:37 PM
fizzleboink fizzleboink is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: to your left
Posts: 125
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

[ QUOTE ]

Yup, the position would be bad. But against 5 players you have huge equity with these hands as they have high card/suited/connected strength.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point, but what about your relative position to the pre-flop raiser? With those hands if you hit a nice flop you can check-raise a big field for 2 bets assuming the pfr leads out. You're sort of giving up an edge now to exploit a bigger edge later. Just a thought.

Edit: I missed the poker stove post just above, looks like I was on the right track.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-11-2005, 12:59 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Turn Action: Donked by a Trickster

I also don't like this play at all.

Winning a small pot is still infinitely better than losing a bigger pot by mucking to one final bet.

If he did have KK-TT (using the hand range from a prior post), then I'd be more than happy to win the pot with a turn-raise, rather than allow the Villain a miracle card on the river just to build a bigger pot. Also, we don't know that he has KK-TT, so raising the turn gets us the additional information sooner, and can possibly get some hands to fold. Given the river appeared to be a blank, I'd bet after a check & probably make a crying call if he raised.

If BB had AA or AK-AQ, I still don't like this play. Raising the turn would most likely cause the 3 bets to be in on the turn (certainly with AA .. but maybe just a call with AK-AQ saving you 1 bet from the above posted action), when you still have a live straight redraw to beat him!!! If the river is a blank, you can fold to his bet (or check behind if he's crazy enough to try a check raise), and you still muck having lost the 3 bets of the posted action. If the river is not a blank, you can win a few more from him.

Given you're going to fold to a river 3 bet, I don't the raise after your redraw to beat your most feared hands didn't come.

Perhaps I'm missing some information about the BB, or something else altogether. I don't see it yet.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.