overpair, huge overbet 6max 1/2

[Reef]

Turn check is correct IMO. Either way ahead or way behind. Could villian do this w/ 77, 99, TT, JJ ?

I'm leaning towards folding this. Calling if he does this next time.

[xcrack999]

[ QUOTE ]
With range of hands and it is most likely pp or AK/AQ for villain to have here you will be ahead on turn more of the times then behind (against quads or 8) So bet turn we shall

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like just thinking, hey, I'm ahead more often than I'm behind, so I'll just bet. There's also the issue of would I be able to get the most money out of him if I'm ahead and lose the least if I'm behind. Let's look at his range of hands. The original poster said that villain is loose, so hands like A8, K8, T8, 98, 87 are all probable holdings. Against these hands, you definitely don't want to bet the turn.

If he has a pocket pair that you're beating right now, he might call a turn bet, OR he might not call a turn bet but will bet on the river if you check the turn. The disadvantage of betting on the turn is it makes your hand very obvious, and he can act correctly most of the time. (with the lower pocket pairs) Against these hands, it's very player-dependent whether you bet or check.

Against overcards, you really don't want to bet. Checking gives his 3-outer a chance to outdraw you, but you conceal your hand and give your opponent a chance to bluff at you, and if he has an overcard that's not an ace and pairs it on the river, you might be able to get a lot of money out of him.

EDIT: What I'm trying to say is that, yes, you're ahead on that turn most of the time, but a lot of the times when you're ahead, your opponent has a hand that he can't call with but can bet with, so you have to adjust your play for that.

[taran]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like just thinking, hey, I'm ahead more often than I'm behind, so I'll just bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to explain it? You don't want to get money in when you are ahead? Are you talking about meta game?

[ QUOTE ]
The original poster said that villain is loose, so hands like A8, K8, T8, 98, 87 are all probable holdings. Against these hands, you definitely don't want to bet the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well do you really want to be truthful here; hero said that it is not 8

[ QUOTE ]
If he has a pocket pair that you're beating right now, he might call a turn bet, OR he might not call a turn bet but will bet on the river if you check the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

In addition to that you will have to call here all the time on river no matter what the bet is. I hope you do realize that it is how big A is playing? You fire continuation bet, get called and then you check behind when you do not hit.
Every time on river villain will either bluff at you big with nothing or have nuts here and in addition you allow him to catch his A or fill up. Furthermore if you have AK here you have to be willing to fire 2nd barrel otherwise you are setting up yourself for bluff and inviting other to take shots at you.

[ QUOTE ]
Against overcards, you really don't want to bet.


[/ QUOTE ]
He is not calling flop bet against pfr knowing he might be drawing dead. he needs here big A or PP to call.

[taran]

FWIW I am not lobbying for a turn bet here. Having said that, what I am hearing so far, is basically weak-tight play which might be 100% correct but I do not see a strong case besides "might", "to be safe" etc

[GimmeDaWatch]

[ QUOTE ]
i checked the turn because a) it seems people love to bluff when the board pairs and b) it would win me more when ahead of something like middle pair as it looks like i'm on overs and lose less when behind as people don't typically overbet like that.

i guess i'm not completely convinced a turn check is wrong because the river situation isn't all that common. however, there are two straight draws and overpairs that i should be extracting value from, therefore a bet is most likely called for.

as for the river call. i guess i'll stop making these calls that used to be +ev at lower levels. he had 55 for the rivered boat. the only hands i'm ahead of are 54 and air and i'm behind a whole bunch of hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya this river bet is weird for sure, but it definitely looks alot more like a huge hand than a bluff. The obvious reason being that If you've got AK/AQ or whatever he could bet half the pot and get you to fold, and if he's got some sort of showdownable middle pair hand this bet is utterly retarded. I sort of like his bet, though. He figures "hey if the guy just has overs he wont call anyway, so if he's got an overpair let's confuse him/make it look like some kind of crazy bluff and maybe he'll call". Of course, you can only go to the well once/player with that one if you exclusively overbet with the nuts.

[xcrack999]

[ QUOTE ]

Care to explain it? You don't want to get money in when you are ahead? Are you talking about meta game?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, you shouldn't bet everytime you're ahead. Everytime you bet, you should be asking yourself, can I get a worse to call and a better hand to fold, and in this case you're not going to get overcards and lower pocket pairs to call and an 8 to fold. If you just bet every time you're ahead without thinking if your opponent is able to call that bet, you're going to have a hard time getting value out of observant players.

[ QUOTE ]
Well do you really want to be truthful here; hero said that it is not 8

[/ QUOTE ]
Like what vanHelsing said, people tend to instant-check when they have a monster, so I think it's incorrect to say villain does not have an 8. People like to slowplay. If you were in villain's shoes, wouldn't you try for a check-raise on the turn if your top pair just turned into trips?

[ QUOTE ]

In addition to that you will have to call here all the time on river no matter what the bet is. I hope you do realize that it is how big A is playing? You fire continuation bet, get called and then you check behind when you do not hit.


[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, that's exactly what you want villain to do. You want him to put you on missed overcards and bluff at you with his missed overcards or value bet his lower PP. He might also check to you with his lower pocket pair expecting to snap off a bluff. It's called inducing a bluff. David Sklansky has an example very similar to this hand in TOP when he was trying to demonstrate that concept. It's on page 196.

[ QUOTE ]
Every time on river villain will either bluff at you big with nothing or have nuts here and in addition you allow him to catch his A or fill up.

[/ QUOTE ]
By your logic, it's mathematically correct to always call on the river since he will be on a bluff a lot more times than he'll have the nuts. Note that if you check behind on the turn and villain bluffs on the river, it's almost always a bet that you can comfortably call. (pot-size or less) You keep saying that if you check the turn, villain is going to make some huge bluff on the end that you can't call, but that's not true at all. After you check behind on the turn, you're representing missed overcards, and no sane player would try to get you to fold your overs by betting three times the pot when they know a much smaller bet would do the job. (unless he has seen you call huge river bets with ace-high) I don't really worry about giving an ace a free card. An ace will come on the river only 6 to 8 percent of the time, and he'll have an ace in the hole only a fraction of that 6 to 8 percent. The value you get from inducing a bluff from ace-high vastly overshadows the value you lose from letting his ace pair.

[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore if you have AK here you have to be willing to fire 2nd barrel otherwise you are setting up yourself for bluff and inviting other to take shots at you.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I agree with that, but you don't have AK here. You have KK.

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW I am not lobbying for a turn bet here. Having said that, what I am hearing so far, is basically weak-tight play which might be 100% correct but I do not see a strong case besides "might", "to be safe" etc

[/ QUOTE ]
Doesn't poker always involve "might" and a degree of uncertainty? If you're 100% sure what your opponents would do, we would not be having this discussion.

[taran]

[ QUOTE ]
If you were in villain's shoes, wouldn't you try for a check-raise on the turn if your top pair just turned into trips?

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course not! Check raise to do what, what will it accomplish? You made your hand- I bet here with made hand with drawing hands, bluff etc.
As I said PP big A calling here. Overpairs are NOT going to call flop bet because they missed and might be drawing dead against pfr. So when I bet I am not betting here for sake of it but knowing what range of hands will call
[ QUOTE ]
David Sklansky has an example very similar ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Re-read my previous post in this thread regarding inducing bluffs- as I said I would prefer to have solid read to induce bluffs- which we do not have here.

[ QUOTE ]
By your logic, it's mathematically correct to always call on the river

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did I say it about calling river? Aren’t we discussing turn bet here?


[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I agree with that, but you don't have AK here. You have KK.

[/ QUOTE ]


Hmm. you lost me there. What range of cards villain is putting hero on? isn'tit safe to assume Ak, big PP. I know that hero has KK

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't poker always involve "might" and a degree of uncertainty

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely. But there is almost always a way to play +EV (unless game theory involved etc)

[xcrack999]

[ QUOTE ]
Where did I say it about calling river? Aren’t we discussing turn bet here?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, but you said if we don't bet the turn this will happen. "Every time on river villain will either bluff at you big with nothing or have nuts here and in addition you allow him to catch his A or fill up," Which leads to my conclusion that if you really believe that, then it's correct to check turn and call his river bet every time.

[ QUOTE ]
As I said PP big A calling here. Overpairs are NOT going to call flop bet because they missed and might be drawing dead against pfr. So when I bet I am not betting here for sake of it but knowing what range of hands will call

[/ QUOTE ]
Say what? Overpairs will absolutely call your flop bet. You say you're betting on the turn knowing what range of hands will call. Then let me ask you something. What range of hands will call that you beat if you bet on the turn? AK and AQ will not call. 44, 55, and 77 will not call. 99, TT, JJ, and QQ might call. So the only times you're getting value out of your turn bet is when your opponent has 99, TT, JJ, or QQ. You might not even be getting value out of these sometimes because they either correctly put you on a high pair and fold or they check-raise you and you're forced to fold a better hand. How about try doing a simple calculation to see if you should bet the turn.

There are 24 combinations of AQ and AK; 18 combinations of 44, 55, and 77; 25 combinations of A8, 98, 87, and 88 (the most probable hands with an eight that villain can have); and 24 combinations 99, TT, JJ, and QQ. So out of the 91 combinations possible, for 67 of them, you want to check the turn and for 24 of them, you want to bet. Do you still want to bet that turn?

[ QUOTE ]
Of course not! Check raise to do what, what will it accomplish? You made your hand- I bet here with made hand with drawing hands, bluff etc.

[/ QUOTE ]
I said in villain's shoes. Even if you won't slowplay with trips, you have to admit that many many people would.

[ QUOTE ]
Re-read my previous post in this thread regarding inducing bluffs- as I said I would prefer to have solid read to induce bluffs- which we do not have here.

[/ QUOTE ]
You do not need solid reads. All we have to know is that villain is loose, not some rock who would never bluff even if induced, and that's a good enough read to try to get him to bluff. A lot of the time, villain won't even be bluffing. He would be value-betting with his lower pocket pair thinking he has the best hand.

So you said you're not lobbying for a turn bet, but you obviously do not like a check. What are you advocating for then? Open fold?

This is all I can say about this hand. If I write more, I'll just be repeating myself, so let's just let this thread die.

[taran]

Last post on this I promise.

[ QUOTE ]
As I said PP big A calling here. Overpairs are NOT going to call…

[/ QUOTE ]


Made a typo - should read "Overcards are NOT going to call…" it could be deciphered from [ QUOTE ]
"As I said PP big A calling here."

[/ QUOTE ]

thread is dead.