Protecting a hand vs. getting more chips

[suited_ace]

I've been noticing that I've been trying to protect my hands maybe too much. I force my opponents to fold, but is this really optimal?

Here's an example:

Blinds at 20/40

UTG 1265
UTG+1 2205
MP1 3670
Hero 1420
MP3 1985
CO+1 140
CO 1950
Button 885
SB 1480
BB 1440

I have A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. Folded to me, I decided to call this time. MP3 calls, BB checks.

(t120) Flop: 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
BB bets 40, Hero raises to 110, MP3 folds, BB calls 70.

(t340) Turn: 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
BB checks, Hero bets 250, BB folds.

This is just an example, but I have been questioning my betting when I have 2 pair or trips and there's a flush or straight on the board. Every time I see 2 cards of the same suit on the flop I tend to assume that I'm always against someone drawing to that flush.

I realize that by not protecting my hand as much I might get outdrawn from time to time, but in the long run would this have +EV?

How do you usually play those hands?

[M.B.E.]

Nothing wrong with the way you played this. If he had an ace, BB would have at least called your turn bet (and perhaps checkraised). If he doesn't have an ace, then what other strategy than the one you followed could have obtained more chips from him?

[Che]

suited_ace-

Not betting the turn here would be terrible if you were playing against me.

The fact that your flop raise priced me in with just about anything makes a free card very dangerous. (Of course, I wouldn't have made a weak lead on this flop, so this line could never have happened against me, but that's another story. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img])

I would recommend raising bigger on the flop and betting about the same (2/3 pot) on any non- [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] turn. What I would do with a [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] turn would be player and/or situation dependent.

Slowplaying two-pair is a great way to let the draws bust you while leaving money on the table that you could have gotten from AK/AQ (or even A4 or JJ for that matter if the opponent is loose enough).

Later,
Che

[crookedhat99]

I'm finding myself in the same situations, and interested in hearing what people have to say.

[JaBlue]

The whole point of a slowplay is to allow them to make a second best hand. In general this makes slowplaying two pair incorrect because if they make a hand, it will win.

[Kronon]

Except for headsup situations and shorthanded games, I almost never slowplay twopair. A few exceptions exists, like if I have AK and the flop is rainbow rag-A-K. At spots like this, you might want to let the opponent think you have a PP, and he might end up betting even if he dont have an ace.

But even in the above example, I will make him pay a lot to see the river. No way I will slowplay this hand until after the river.

I used to slowplay sets a lot, but yesterday in the 109$ tourney at PP I had QQ with the flop 27Q rainbow. If ever there was a slowplaying opportunity with a set, this is it. But since my opponent came out betting, I raised him with the same amount he betted, and he immediately moved all-in with AQ.

To sum it up: dont slowplay, except in rare situations. You will often get atleast as much money by betting, and you will stop yourself the agony of bad beats where the opponent makes hit gutshot on the river.

Headsup and shorthandes is different. In those situations you can even slowplay a toppair occasionally.

[suited_ace]

My question is not if I should bet. I know I can't give my opponent a free card here. My question is if just giving just a little less than the odds he needs to stay on the hand is good enough.

Let's say that in this example my opponent was on a flush draw. On the turn he's 4 to 1 against making his flush on the river. Theoretically, I could have bet 120 on the turn and he would still be getting the worst of it.

My question is if betting a little less than what I'm betting now would have +EV in the long run.

[Che]

[ QUOTE ]
Theoretically, I could have bet 120 on the turn and he would still be getting the worst of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You profit when your opponents make mistakes.

If you bet 120 on the turn against a flush draw, what mistake can he make? His EV (assuming you play perfectly) is only -3 or some similarly negligible number.

Why risk giving away the entire pot to increase your EV by 3 chips? Bet strong (at least half the pot) so he either overpays or you take it down now. Your EV is much, much greater either way.

OTOH if he calls the 120 on the turn and you fold to a river [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], you will often be the one making a mistake. Alternatively, if he checks a river [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] and you check behind, you will again often be making a mistake when you could have made a value bet against a one-pair hand.

The problem with underbetting is that it gets you deeper into the hand without any added information and you don't gain any (meaningful) chip EV either.

Later,
Che

[Toy4x4]

There is absolutely no reason to slow play a hand like this in an MTT. You can't reach into your pocket a buy more chips. Take the pot down and don't risk loosing chips in an MTT that are crucial to your survival.

[suited_ace]

Good point. Here's another thing: I was thinking about expressed odds only, and forgot about the implied odds. The implied odds my opponent would be getting are more than enough for him to make a call.

Well, case closed. Thanks, Che.