Set of Aces facing raise; str8 possible on board.

pokernicus · #1 10-18-2005, 03:52 AM

Villain is semi-loose. Every time I saw him raise, he had a hand. He comes to life on the turn, and I'm wondering if I should be smooth-calling his raise or three-bet. [I definitely can't fold this!] Suggestions on all streets (especially 4th street) are appreciated.

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is Button with A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
4 folds, MP2 calls, 2 folds, Hero raises, SB calls, 1 fold, MP2 calls.

Flop: (7 SB) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (3 players)
SB checks, MP2 checks, Hero bets, SB calls, MP2 folds.

Turn: (4.50 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, SB raises, Hero ???

jaxUp · #2 10-18-2005, 03:54 AM

3-bet. If he caps, c/c UI

#3 10-18-2005, 04:02 AM

If he is semi lose I'd say he holds A9 and spiked a 2 pair.
I'd 3-bet the turn and if he caps I'd call it down. No way I'm folding though.

#4 10-18-2005, 05:06 AM

Grunching...

Preflop & Flop are standard.

Turn: I'd 3-bet and if he caps see the showdown as cheaply as possible UI. If you're read is right and we need a boat or quads to win, we have 10 outs. If we fill up on river prepare to cap it. If we don't C/C. No way I fold.

p.s. This is still one of the weakest parts of my game (playing made hands correctly), so thanks for your post and the chance to grunch it.

pokernicus · #5 10-18-2005, 02:54 PM

Thanks for the replies! They are definitely appreciated.

In the actual hand, I three-bet the turn, villain capped, and I called. At this point I figured either QJ or 99 would be consistent with the way s/he played the hand (with QJ being the more likely possibility).

The river was a 9. Villain bet out. With the appearance of another 9, I figured QJ now to be even more likely, so I raised. (If villain was lucky enough to make quads to beat my Aces full, then I'd chalk it up to bad poker karma and lose the extra big bets. However, this seemed to be too remote of a possibility to warrant not going for the value raise.)

Villain called my raise and showed QJs for the straight made on the turn, and my Aces full was good enough to drag down a nice pot.

One reason for mentioning this hand is that from a pure FTP/EV perspective, I technically shouldn't have 3-bet this.

Nonetheless, it seemed like the right decision given the information I had at the time (especially since Villain could have one of a number of hands that are worse). Also, 3-betting defines my hand much better than calling would, otherwise, I wouldn't know where I stood.

DCWildcat · #6 10-18-2005, 02:58 PM

NH. A couple comments:
You don't really need definition here. It's the turn, and you've been check-raised. He's definately got something. Also, the 3-bet decision isn't really close; if you're routinely check/calling down here, you might be killing your profit.

Greg J · #7 10-18-2005, 02:59 PM

Remember that hands like T9 (and 98) are common. You were right to see the straight possibilities of course, but just as often a villian has actually hit 2 pair here.

VoraciousReader · #8 10-18-2005, 03:02 PM

Back to grunching, because I'm not happy with the way I've been playing lately. (I've been winning, but my pokering has quite frankly, stunk.)

I don't play 1/2 but at .50/1 I would 3-bet this. I think you'll see A9 (or sometimes a slowplayed underset) more often than the straight here.

Reqtech · #9 10-18-2005, 03:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]

One reason for mentioning this hand is that from a pure FTP/EV perspective, I technically shouldn't have 3-bet this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, yeah, if you had seen his cards you shouldn't have raised. Instead, you can only put him on a range of possibilities, where a straight is but one of them. He could have also made a set or 2 pair. So your raise here was good.

detruncate · #10 10-18-2005, 04:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]

One reason for mentioning this hand is that from a pure FTP/EV perspective, I technically shouldn't have 3-bet this.

Nonetheless, it seemed like the right decision given the information I had at the time (especially since Villain could have one of a number of hands that are worse).

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing to remember about the FTP is that you're usually not playing against Villain's specific hand. You're instead playing against the full range of his of most likely hands, and therefore have to make a decision that addresses the multifaceted nature of things.

There's one hand that beats you on the turn (JQ), and it's a fairly common starting hand. But there are a lot of other reasonable possibilities for a loose player (several different 2-pair hands, a slowplayed set, a turned set). Unless you have some way of putting him on specifically JQ (which you almost never will), you have to make the play that seems most likely to win you the most in the longrun (i.e., after all the possibilities have played out).

There are many more combinations of hands you beat than beat you. Hence the 3-bet. But once you're capped you can pretty much eliminate all the two pair combinations unless Villain is very aggressive, leaving you with sets and the straight. If he wouldn't slowplay a flopped set, you're looking at just JQ or 99, and the straight is therefore most likely -- it can be made more ways, and while a set will be capped most of the time, it's not uncommon for passive players to just call a 3-bet (sometimes planning to stop and go, sometimes because they start to get very worried about AA or TT or just don't feel comfortable capping in general without the nuts).

This comes into play again on the river. Given that he was less likely to be on 99, another 9 shouldn't stop you from putting in a raise. Even more so if slowplayed sets can't be eliminated as possibilities.