The Live Strategy and Content Thread

[JuddsABlue]

I've seen the term value-own in this thread from a couple of you, but have never encountered it before. A quick Googling of it spat back this definition from Deuces Cracked: making what you think is a value bet when in fact you are behind, usually after being deceived/trapped.

Is this a fair approximation of what was meant by it?

The same post on DC mentioned value-cut also, but having either the same meaning or a different one (~ an attempted value bet that was too big, so hero loses value because the villian folded). Thoughts from those in the know?

Yeah that explanation is correct. Value owning is thinking you're good and making a value bet and getting called by a better hand. Usually you'll say you've Value owned yourself when you think you've played a hand really well and often looking for thin value on the river. EDIT: Didnt like my examples. Hand above is a good example, where if the river bricks and A12 bets his pocket Kings thinking theyre good and gets snapped off by an ace

Value cut is new to me but that explanation makes sense or possible underbetting and missing some value on the river, say for example in a set over set situation you bet way too small on all 3 streets but enough for villian to just call you down with, when usually you'd be in for stacks had you bet properly (Im just making this up, makes sense to me but I dont know for sure)

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

Here is a very tricky hand for you guys to try and work out.

5/10 NHLE. Game is full of fish like usual, and we are 6 handed at this stage.

Hero $6400 stack
Villain around $4500 stack

Both hero and villain are easily the two most aggro and competent players at the table. I am directly to villains left. Since the game has been 6 handed, I have been 3 betting at least once an orbit. Villain has been doing the same thing. Villain and hero got in a pre flop raising war in the hand previous, where I 3 bet villain with air to $120, villain 4 bet me to $300, I 5 bet him $880, then villain jams. I laugh and muck my 8 high. Villain flips over 2 7, smiles, shakes his head and taps me on the shoulder.

Villain has massive ego and there is a bit of aggro in the air between us. Villain and hero have history, not just from the night in question, but have played against each other a lot. We have been involved in some monster pots with some monster suckouts in the past.

Hand in question.

Hero on the button. Villain in the cutoff.

Folds around to villain who raises to 40, hero looks down at 9:diamond:7:diamond: and 3 bets to $110, blinds fold, villain flat calls. Flop 2:spade: 5:spade: J:club:. Villian leads out for $140, I decide to float villain and flat call with air to bet/raise turn or river. Turn 7 . Villian checks, I fire $370, villain tanks for what seems and eternity smooth calls. River J :diamond:. Villain checks instantly, I decide I want value. After 30 seconds deliberation I bet $500, villain insta raises to $2000. Given the way the hand was played, the nature of the river check-raise, and history between myself and villain, what should I do here. It's $1500 more to win a pot of $3755. Hero?

Spoiler to come.

 

[Ricketts]

I play $1/$2, so don't feel you have to take what I say seriously.

But I reckon call.

I'm trying to think of what he beats you with here that he would not bet the turn after betting the flop. All I can think of is 88/99/TT, where after you call him on the flop, he is happy to show down as cheap as possible? Then after the river is a second Jack, he figures his 88/99/TT is good as you most likely don't have a Jack.

But why would he raise 88/99/TT? Surely very thin thinking you'll call with worse?

OK now I'm talking myself out of thinking he has 88/99/TT.

I guess he could have had 77 for the same reasoning on the flop and turn as thinking 88/99/TT. Sneaky check on the river though?

I'm sticking with Call. As I think he is trying to make you fold, and "bet-flop, check-turn, bet-river" is very weak and you'd call him quite easily. So he might figure the better/stronger-looking way to get you to fold is by checkraising the river.

 

[JuddsABlue]

This is hard knowing villian is competent. If I'm villian I'm c/raising the river for value a lot, but if villian is competend hes probably balancing this pretty well.

A lot of this hand is based on metagame which is hard, but I cant imagine villian thinking you're flatting any random Jx hands, so flatting and betting turn doesnt seem to fit the J profile. From there all of villians 88 through TT and better increase in value, along with overpairs.

Knowing that you're hardly ever ever checking behind river Villian probably sees a lot of value in c/raising

but if villian is thinking like that he probably sees it can often be better to bet/call against you with history for more value

It just doesnt seem random/spazzy enough to be a bluff, so I'm folding and probably wrong like I was last time

 

[checkraiseulite]

My main point is to question why in such a juicy game full of fish you are putting yourself in awkward spots against the only other competent player at the table who also happens to be >2BI deep.

I also think it's pretty bad to bet the river without knowing what you're going to do if he raises beforehand, especially against such a volatile player.

I'll think about the hand and post something up later but again it's hard to say given the intense history/meta involved.

 

[red+black]

OK, going to try analyse the hand like a normal person. But so many hands from 2/5 and 5/10 do my head in. Do you have to play for your stack every hand? How the **** does Joey Knish survive games like this? No wonder a lot of players prefer tournaments.

I'm assuming the 8-high v 7-high is of some relevance, maybe it's just a **** you if you try to put me on a range of hands, so don't even bother. From the way you've posted I get the impression you called and the call was good, but I'm going to say you're beat and should fold. The problem I find with MSNL is I don't see the relevance of image and history and stack sizes. For all I know he has complete air like A3, A4, 6-high, ****, I don't know.

I can't think at this level hence I don't play at this level. Might be easier for me to apply some 3rd level thinking but too often I feel villain isn't putting any thought into what hero has, chances are hero never has enough to stand up to relentless pressure.

Anyway, rant over, to me villain's range could be TT/99/88/77/55/22, XXss, or he has the black and white joker and a hobgoblin. For some reason I'm not giving him credit for a J, not sure why. So why has he checked 4th and 5th. Is the tank-flat on 4th and insta-check on 5th a weak/strong thing? Is he hoping you've literally tripped up and you were drawing dead on the turn?

Villain checks instantly, I decide I want value.

How do you extract value here? And from what? A check-shove bluff that you'll call?

I have no idea. I fold.

 

[red+black]

Dying for a comment, from anyone.

 

[ashley12]

I posted the hand on 2+2 and I think this response from a poster on there summed it up perfectly.

"River is an easy bluff based on your likely flop and turn calling range in his shoes. Turn is close to a fold, but river is an easy call based on how his valuebetting range changes from turn to river."

Not so sure about this. If he was a bit of a showdown monkey with a heavily polarised range then yeah, sure its probably a relatively standard call since he has a limited amount of A and K hands in his bet three streets for value range. But if he is capable of either
a) turning hands better then yours into bluffs such as sets and bigger two pairs or
b) value betting all his flushes then it becomes far from a trivial call.

While I agree that it is very difficult for you have to have the A or K in your range to call the flop and turn, and that you know that he knows that and as such will be calling with more then just say, 7 flushes and above. Whether he realises this is key, and is the basic reason while text hands vs people we don't actually know, while great in terms of grasping concepts and basic philosophies, makes it difficult to really give accurate responses without knowing the villian in person and playing a number of hours with them.

Plus you actually get the chance to soul read him

Also, more out of curiosity, if the river comes the 7, which gives you a full house on a four flush board, are you donking or going for the checkraise? What about offsuit 7's and 6's?

Just for the record for our newer readers, a polarised range means that the opponent usually has either a very very good hand (in this case, either the ace or king of hearts) or a very bad hand that if he checks behind, is very unlikely to win the pot at showdown.

If we are up against someone who we believe to have a polarised range, our best plan is usually to check and then call when they bet. What we actually have in our hand is usually somewhat irrelevant.

If we rated poker hands on a sliding scale of 1-10, with 1 being complete cheese and 10 being the nuts, and we believe that the villian has a polarised range being either a 9-10 for basically the nuts, and 1-2 for Ace high or one pair, then it doesnt matter whether we call with a hand that is an 8/10 on a relative scale or a 3/10, since both the 8's and 3's win against the 1's and lose to the 10's. Going back to HAD's example, if villian is going to bet with only the A, then K, and a hand that doesn't have a pair, then it doesnt matter if we call with the Q or a pair of 7's, since they get the same result vs his betting range.

If your the one betting with a polarised range, and it seems that villians are going to be calling you down somewhat light (a common occurance at lower levels) then the solution is to valuebet thinner. Again using HAD's example, if we think the villian will bet every single hand that is a flush, then it becomes a lot harder to call with a bluff-catching hand because you lose to far more combinations of flushes, both turned and rivered. We can also bluff with hands with a little more showdown value, which will occasinally make our opponent call as a bluff catch and lose to one of our bluffs that is just better then his hand, such as if villian bluffed with bottom set on this board in an attempt to fold out a straight.

A major leak of lower level players is doing things like checking back sets when the flush card comes on the river when checked too. Our opponents would usually bet a flush, so they usually have a top pair kind of hand that would call a 1/2 pot bet or so on the river anyway.

Villian usually has one of four hands here. Flush draw, straight draw, baby ace, or middle pair. Very rarely will he have a set.

First option is check behind for pot control and re-evaluate on the river. This is the option I like the least. With so many draws on board, combined with description of the villian and the way the villian has played the hand so far, I don't like giving a free card here. That's where option 2 comes into play. 2:diamond: is a complete brick so bet around 75% of the pot. The pot is $137, so bet $100. This makes it $100 for villian to call into $237, giving him the incorrect odds to call the turn to hit a draw on the river.

By betting $100 here, you also push most people off baby aces and middle pair. I think the major mistake a lot of amatuers and inexperienced players make, is playing their Kings passively because they are scared of the ace on board.

There are multiple scenarios on the river, but I will just run through the most likely ones.

First sceanrio, is villian flat calls the $100 bet on the turn and the river bricks. If villian leads out on the river brick, snap call. After check calling two streets and then leading out on the river brick, most times he will have a busted draw here the way the hand was played. If Villian hit two pair, or played a set like a ****, not much you can do. But by calling the villians bet on the river in this situation, you are definitely winning more times than losing.

Second scenario. If villian calls the $100 turn bet then checks the river brick, then check behind. If you try and value bet here, you are only getting called by better hands ( baby ace, weak two pair etc ). You could try and get fancy and jam here to take villian off a baby ace, or two pair, but it's not something I would do at 2/5. Kings have showdown value with so many busted draws on board.

Third scenario, river is a :club:, 8 or 3. Villian checks. This check here would automatically make me think he has an ace and is scared of the river card. This being the case, I would jam here and turn my Kings into a bluff. You could push villian off most hands here by making him play for stacks on a wet board.

Fourth scenario, river is :club:, 8 or 3. Villian leads out. The size of the bet here and villians physical tells would determine my next course of action. Most times I am folding though.

I dont think villian will fold any ace on the turn. Earlier in the session I outleveled myself into 4bet shoving after opening with ATs, getting three callers and effectively minraised (20 to 50) by the button. I thought about it, decided on shoving, and immediately hated life when called by both random passive villian with AK and button with QQ. He did see this hand, and also personally told me to STFU because I was discussing a random logic problem with a friend during a hand that he wasnt in but apperently I was ruining the game with my conversation. I responded by instantly moving to his left lol.

You basically nailed it apart from that. I bet $80 on the turn and he thought for a bit and called. River was a complete blank, like a red deuce or something, and I fairly quickly checked back and lost to A:club:6:club:. Relatively standard hand IMO, but a friend of mine said he checks the turn and calls the river on bricks to snap off river bluffs, which I thought was kinda lame on a flushing board with a relatively obv OESD as well. Just wondering if anyone else thought that way.

On a rainbow board I would think about his line, but would bet the river if checked to twice for sure, which would obviously mean a valueown myself a fair bit, but would get called by a decent number of 7x and 88-JJ hands etc...

I've seen the term value-own in this thread from a couple of you, but have never encountered it before. A quick Googling of it spat back this definition from Deuces Cracked: making what you think is a value bet when in fact you are behind, usually after being deceived/trapped.

Is this a fair approximation of what was meant by it?

The same post on DC mentioned value-cut also, but having either the same meaning or a different one (~ an attempted value bet that was too big, so hero loses value because the villian folded). Thoughts from those in the know?

Value owning is just like bluffing in that if you dont do it and get caught out a % of the time, then you arent value betting enough or bluffing enough.

When we bet the river for value, we need to beat 51% of their calling range to make it a profitable bet (assuming we never get raised). We have to calculate our opponents range to call and how much of that we beat.

In my KK hand, while I beat a lot of my opponents range on the turn (such as busted flush draws and 56 as well as 7's) only 7's have any chance of calling on blank rivers. If we give my opponent a calling range of all aces he could have on the turn, and 1/2 of the 7's (if they have an equal amount of 7x hands and Ax hands they can have on the turn), then we should check behind since we lose to 66% of what hands they can call the river with.

However, if my opponent will fold his busted draws but call with all his Ax, 7x, and 4x hands (and he has all of those hands equally), then I need to value bet. Sure, its possible that I might lose $130 or so because he check calls with A9o or whatever, but a higher % of the time I win when he calls the river with worse then my kings.

Granted extreme situation. So you're saying we fold to any river heart because we saw his cards? But a) unlikely we ever know exactly what our opponent has, and b) how often are we not committing any money on a river flush card? I guess what I'm struggling with is how to play when we are likely to be ahead, whether we are IP or OOP, and are the PFR or otherwise.

While we will not know exactly what an opponent holds, we can construct a range and see how our hand performs vs our range.

A relatively common theory is Well Ahead/Well Behind (WA/WB). Its more of a limit idea, but the general concept is that if we have a hand that is okay but not awesome, we just check and call and allow our opponents to bluff away their chips. A good example is say, JTo on a T52-7-7 with a flush draw board that missed., when we were raised on the flop. If his range is purely sets and draws, we are best off just checking and calling the river allowing us to win more when ahead and lose less when crushed.

We can make the same range and probability trees on the turn in HAD's hand vs the villian. It would work out similar to mine in that a % of the time he takes us for a bit, but far more he either value bets worse on brick rivers such as overpairs or bluffs with busted draws and random hands. Its easier to explain the concepts in simple hands though.

Also, about your comment RE: getting value, we can get called by worse hands including solid Ace highs and smaller pocket pairs. At the higher levels, when we go for thin value we do run the risk of being check/raised, so we need to keep that in mind. We never get check/raised at 1/2 or 2/5, or very rarely.

HAD, about your hand, I probably wouldnt have 3bet preflop in position since I would hate to play your hand in a 4bet pot or have to fold in position. I also agree with CRuL in that Im not sure why screwing with the only other good player in a nice juiceball game is a good idea, but Im a lover not a fighter and try to not get into massive preflop leveling wars (though we dont play as deep obviously). I think I have 4bet less then JJ or AK like once in my life haha...

I might have checked the turn to bluff-catch the river if he is the kind of person who really attacks preceived "weakness".

On the river given you tanked for 30 seconds I think I would be more likely to call compared to a relatively "in rhythem" river bet. I also think he NEVER checks a jack on the turn.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

I play $1/$2, so don't feel you have to take what I say seriously.

But I reckon call.

I'm trying to think of what he beats you with here that he would not bet the turn after betting the flop. All I can think of is 88/99/TT, where after you call him on the flop, he is happy to show down as cheap as possible? Then after the river is a second Jack, he figures his 88/99/TT is good as you most likely don't have a Jack.

But why would he raise 88/99/TT? Surely very thin thinking you'll call with worse?

OK now I'm talking myself out of thinking he has 88/99/TT.

I guess he could have had 77 for the same reasoning on the flop and turn as thinking 88/99/TT. Sneaky check on the river though?

I'm sticking with Call. As I think he is trying to make you fold, and "bet-flop, check-turn, bet-river" is very weak and you'd call him quite easily. So he might figure the better/stronger-looking way to get you to fold is by checkraising the river.

I did call. Spot on re: his line, it was very strange.

This is hard knowing villian is competent. If I'm villian I'm c/raising the river for value a lot, but if villian is competend hes probably balancing this pretty well.

A lot of this hand is based on metagame which is hard, but I cant imagine villian thinking you're flatting any random Jx hands, so flatting and betting turn doesnt seem to fit the J profile. From there all of villians 88 through TT and better increase in value, along with overpairs.

Knowing that you're hardly ever ever checking behind river Villian probably sees a lot of value in c/raising

but if villian is thinking like that he probably sees it can often be better to bet/call against you with history for more value

It just doesnt seem random/spazzy enough to be a bluff, so I'm folding and probably wrong like I was last time

That's close to the way I was thinking. But villian does take really weird lines in hands and is range is completely polarised. He is def capable of spazzing out on the river here with complete air.

My main point is to question why in such a juicy game full of fish you are putting yourself in awkward spots against the only other competent player at the table who also happens to be >2BI deep.

I also think it's pretty bad to bet the river without knowing what you're going to do if he raises beforehand, especially against such a volatile player.

I'll think about the hand and post something up later but again it's hard to say given the intense history/meta involved.

Where's the fun in that? Sure I spent a lot of energy beating up on the fish, but when two ultra aggro players with a lot of history are at the same table, it usually doesn't end well.

And why would you try and avoid tricky situations for? That's where most good players have an edge and make money.

I had to bet the river there, as he is going to make a lot of check raises with air in this situation, and call me with a lot of hands I can beat. I am losing out on money if I check behind when I have the best hand. I really didn't mind making the river decision either, as I thought the I was ahead on the turn and the river J changed nothing. And as I have stated previously, the villain took a strange line in this hand. If I think I'm ahead and can get paid, I'm going to bet 100% of the time.

OK, going to try analyse the hand like a normal person. But so many hands from 2/5 and 5/10 do my head in. Do you have to play for your stack every hand? How the **** does Joey Knish survive games like this? No wonder a lot of players prefer tournaments.

I'm assuming the 8-high v 7-high is of some relevance, maybe it's just a **** you if you try to put me on a range of hands, so don't even bother. From the way you've posted I get the impression you called and the call was good, but I'm going to say you're beat and should fold. The problem I find with MSNL is I don't see the relevance of image and history and stack sizes. For all I know he has complete air like A3, A4, 6-high, ****, I don't know.

I can't think at this level hence I don't play at this level. Might be easier for me to apply some 3rd level thinking but too often I feel villain isn't putting any thought into what hero has, chances are hero never has enough to stand up to relentless pressure.

Anyway, rant over, to me villain's range could be TT/99/88/77/55/22, XXss, or he has the black and white joker and a hobgoblin. For some reason I'm not giving him credit for a J, not sure why. So why has he checked 4th and 5th. Is the tank-flat on 4th and insta-check on 5th a weak/strong thing? Is he hoping you've literally tripped up and you were drawing dead on the turn?


How do you extract value here? And from what? A check-shove bluff that you'll call?

I have no idea. I fold.

Hehe

2/5 plays like 2/3 imo, only more ABC as there are more tags at 2/5 ( although a lot of them are bad tags ). Whilst 5/10 is a step up, but still has a heap of fish. Fish are basically just fish, whether it's at 1/2, 2/5, 5/10 or 10/20. Sure the fish might be a bit more competent at the higher levels, though it doesn't mean they can't be exploited.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

Spoiler for hand above: Unlike the first hand I posted in this thread, I called this time and made the right decision. I put in the $1500, villain says nh and flips over 3:spade: 4:spade:. I show him my hand and he says he should have check raised the turn. I nod in an agreement and rake in chips

By betting that $500 on the end, I earnt an extra $2000. Happy days.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

a) turning hands better then yours into bluffs such as sets and bigger two pairs or
b) value betting all his flushes then it becomes far from a trivial call.

Also, more out of curiosity, if the river comes the 7, which gives you a full house on a four flush board, are you donking or going for the checkraise? What about offsuit 7's and 6's?

Back to first hand I posted. I don't think he was capable of turning two pair/set/straight into bluff there. Hence why I think I should have called.

If the river comes 7 . I am probably check raising most times. Probably min check raising to allow villain to bluff and come over the top. An arguement can be made for donking or c/r, but since I know villian is highly likely to fire a third time with air, I like check raising small here.

 

[JuddsABlue]

Spoiler for hand above: Unlike the first hand I posted in this thread, I called this time and made the right decision. I put in the $1500, villain says nh and flips over 3:spade: 4:spade:. I show him my hand and he says he should have check raised the turn. I nod in an agreement and rake in chips

By betting that $500 on the end, I earnt an extra $2000. Happy days.

nhnh, so I guess you found it spazzy enough and metagame was enough to find a call and outlevelled him

I came back and wrote (then deleted) that it has to be a bet/call if you decide to bet, but I thought it conflicted too much with my original reply so I took it away.

I'm really torn because I still probably want to fold but also dont want to check back river, but feel if we're betting it has to be a bet/call.

Either way nice call, I dont love c/calling from him on the turn and then checking river either. He has to be certain you're betting river and he has to be 100% committed to river c/raise bluff which can be tricky.

If river spades and he leads out you....?

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

dont think villian will fold any ace on the turn. Earlier in the session I outleveled myself into 4bet shoving after opening with ATs, getting three callers and effectively minraised (20 to 50) by the button. I thought about it, decided on shoving, and immediately hated life when called by both random passive villian with AK and button with QQ. He did see this hand, and also personally told me to STFU because I was discussing a random logic problem with a friend during a hand that he wasnt in but apperently I was ruining the game with my conversation. I responded by instantly moving to his left lol.

You basically nailed it apart from that. I bet $80 on the turn and he thought for a bit and called. River was a complete blank, like a red deuce or something, and I fairly quickly checked back and lost to A:club:6:club:. Relatively standard hand IMO, but a friend of mine said he checks the turn and calls the river on bricks to snap off river bluffs, which I thought was kinda lame on a flushing board with a relatively obv OESD as well. Just wondering if anyone else thought that way.

On a rainbow board I would think about his line, but would bet the river if checked to twice for sure, which would obviously mean a valueown myself a fair bit, but would get called by a decent number of 7x and 88-JJ hands etc...

Ah makes more sense now. If villain is a calling station, then it is an excerise in futility trying to push him off top pair.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

nhnh, so I guess you found it spazzy enough and metagame was enough to find a call and outlevelled him

I came back and wrote (then deleted) that it has to be a bet/call if you decide to bet, but I thought it conflicted too much with my original reply so I took it away.

I'm really torn because I still probably want to fold but also dont want to check back river, but feel if we're betting it has to be a bet/call.

Either way nice call, I dont love c/calling from him on the turn and then checking river either. He has to be certain you're betting river and he has to be 100% committed to river c/raise bluff which can be tricky.

If river spades and he leads out you....?

If the river spades and he leads out, I fold some and call some. Depending on what spade, what the bet size was etc. I'm not raising there unless I have a perfect read on the player. If it was the J:spade:, there is probably more of a reason to jam if you think villain has a flush and can be pushed off it by the board pairing. But it is still a high risk play, and not one I like against this particular player who seems to have made it his life ambition to outplay and stack me every single hand. Also my hand still has some showdown value as well. Calling or folding is the best play in that situation.

 

[checkraiseulite]

I had to bet the river there, as he is going to make a lot of check raises with air in this situation, and call me with a lot of hands I can beat. I am losing out on money if I check behind when I have the best hand. I really didn't mind making the river decision either, as I thought the I was ahead on the turn and the river J changed nothing. And as I have stated previously, the villain took a strange line in this hand. If I think I'm ahead and can get paid, I'm going to bet 100% of the time.

I think you're missing my point. I don't have a problem with value betting the river, but before I decided to value-bet the river I'd know whether i'm calling a check-raise.

The initial problem I had was 3betting villain with 97, and then floating him with nothing when he's competent, you're both deep and fish are occupying the rest of the seats. Turn and river is standard albeit high level stuff.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

I think you're missing my point. I don't have a problem with value betting the river, but before I decided to value-bet the river I'd know whether i'm calling a check-raise.

The initial problem I had was 3betting villain with 97, and then floating him with nothing when he's competent, you're both deep and fish are occupying the rest of the seats. Turn and river is standard albeit high level stuff.

I was always pretty sure I was going to call a check raise when I was value betting that river. I couldn't put him a Jack or big over pair, as he check-called the turn, so the river J was a brick for the villian in a lot of instances. He's probably going to check-call the river with a medium pair, or if he has a 7. When he check raised that river I knew it was air most times.

In regards to the 3 bet with 9 high, I think that was the right play. Villian is very competent, but I have a pretty good line on his play and feel confident in position against him. He is prone to blowing up sometimes, and every hand he plays against me he tries to outplay me. Despite being a good player, villian can get spewy against me and there is a very good chance of me winning a big pot against him.

Floating isn't a bad idea in this spot. I often float or raise suspicious flop donk bets or c-bets when I have air. It works quite a lot. And particuarly after I 3 bet pre flop, I can't exactly fold on the flop to a donk bet can I. I'm just burning money if I do.

Edit: On that board, if I raise villains donk bet on the flop, instead of floating it. I open myself up to a re-raise from the villain, which I'm sure he would have done with a draw, a monster, or air. Raising his donk bet looks weak imo, but flat calling then firing/raising turn and river in position sells a better story.

 

[checkraiseulite]

Another hand for discussion.

$2/5NL at Crown. Hero is ~$1300 deep and is probably perceived as somewhat active and creative. Villain is >$2000 deep and is an older reg who is TAG but capable of making big bluffs/light call-downs, wearing lots of jewellery including a very expensive watch.

We have played many sessions before but have no real non-standard history/meta. I'd say we are both familiar with eachother's game.

There are a couple of fish at the table who are limp-calling OOP and then playing fit/fold post-flop. Villain has been isolating fish quite a lot.

I'm on the button with 5:spade:6:spade: Villain is CO. Fish in EP limps and villain raise to $30. I raise to ~$95. Fish folds and villain calls.

Flop is 2:spade:4:spade:9x. Villain checks, hero checks.

Turn is 10x. Villain checks, hero bets ~$130, villain calls.

River is 10:spade: Villain checks, hero bets ~$325. Villain moves all in, hero???????

EDIT: I'm also aware of the irony of this hand considering my advice above re: HAD's 97 hand.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

Another hand for discussion.

$2/5NL at Crown. Hero is ~$1300 deep and is probably perceived as somewhat active and creative. Villain is >$2000 deep and is an older reg who is TAG but capable of making big bluffs/light call-downs, wearing lots of jewellery including a very expensive watch.

We have played many sessions before but have no real non-standard history/meta. I'd say we are both familiar with eachother's game.

There are a couple of fish at the table who are limp-calling OOP and then playing fit/fold post-flop. Villain has been isolating fish quite a lot.

I'm on the button with 5:spade:6:spade: Villain is CO. Fish in EP limps and villain raise to $30. I raise to ~$95. Fish folds and villain calls.

Flop is 2:spade:4:spade:9x. Villain checks, hero checks.

Turn is 10x. Villain checks, hero bets ~$130, villain calls.

River is 10:spade: Villain checks, hero bets ~$325. Villain moves all in, hero???????

EDIT: I'm also aware of the irony of this hand considering my advice above re: HAD's 97 hand.

Errrrrrr this is an icky spot. I really think after 3 betting pre-flop and then flopping a combo draw, you should have bet the flop. Particuarly since you have position.

I can't put villain on anything but the nut flush draw here to be honest. It's not inconceivable that villain had Ace x of :spade:, and checked the flop hoping to check-raise you. When you checked behind and the turn was a blank, I can see why he would check-call with the nut flush there. Then when the river was a spade, it's not hard to see why he would check-raise here with the nut flush.

You have really under-repped your hand on the flop, and there is no way villain could put you on a flush after you checking a flush draw on the flop in position.

Villain has probably put you on three 10s the way the hand was played and is hoping to get paid by check-raising the river. I would probably fold the river.

 

[JuddsABlue]

Another hand for discussion.

$2/5NL at Crown. Hero is ~$1300 deep and is probably perceived as somewhat active and creative. Villain is >$2000 deep and is an older reg who is TAG but capable of making big bluffs/light call-downs, wearing lots of jewellery including a very expensive watch.

We have played many sessions before but have no real non-standard history/meta. I'd say we are both familiar with eachother's game.

There are a couple of fish at the table who are limp-calling OOP and then playing fit/fold post-flop. Villain has been isolating fish quite a lot.

I'm on the button with 5:spade:6:spade: Villain is CO. Fish in EP limps and villain raise to $30. I raise to ~$95. Fish folds and villain calls.

Flop is 2:spade:4:spade:9x. Villain checks, hero checks.

Turn is 10x. Villain checks, hero bets ~$130, villain calls.

River is 10:spade: Villain checks, hero bets ~$325. Villain moves all in, hero???????

EDIT: I'm also aware of the irony of this hand considering my advice above re: HAD's 97 hand.

Your flop and turn action should be reversed imo

Agter 3betting then flopping monstor draw on a shitty flop for a large % of opening raises, with position, a cbet is standard here and super profitable.

As played on the flop, I prefer a turn check because villians now probably c/calling a lot of aces, so betting turn puts you in a spot where you need to fire another bullet when you miss.

Interesting river card and I think villian can have a lot of tens in his range and play them this way. If I'm imagening the type of player you've described correctly hands like JT/AT/KT are the nuts for him here because of how much you've underrepped your hand

Not saying its a snap call, but dont want to snap muck either. I'm pretty undecided and would probably want to use some live info to help with my decision.

HAD your explanation makes a lot of sense, which again makes it so hard. With the flop check ranges become a lot wider.

 

[checkraiseulite]

I checked back the flop for 2 reasons mostly.

(1) I don't really want to get check-raised with the his hand which villain can do a lot. If I am less deep I'm b/calling a shove obviously.

(2) It underreps my hand so when a spade drops on the turn villain can never put me on a flush as I would always cbet my flush draws. Therefore he may believe spades are good bluffing cards for him.

I will post up the results later tonight. I think I have to the turn when checked to too.

 

[rowie343]

I checked back the flop for 2 reasons mostly.

(1) I don't really want to get check-raised with the his hand which villain can do a lot. If I am less deep I'm b/calling a shove obviously.

(2) It underreps my hand so when a spade drops on the turn villain can never put me on a flush as I would always cbet my flush draws. Therefore he may believe spades are good bluffing cards for him.

I will post up the results later tonight. I think I have to the turn when checked to too.

I prefer the flop cbet to follow on from your pre 3bet to rep strength. The level they play live at crown, you immediately telling your opponent that you are weak with a check on the flop here with a flush draw out there. You have plenty of equity in the hand to not be afraid of the check raise on the flop. You continue to keep him guessing whether or not you have overpair with flop cbet. You then can decide what to do on the turn, but free card to river would be nice. A bet on flop would also raise chances of check behind from him on the turn thus allowing you to go to the river.

I would call the river bet here. You underrepped your hand flop onwards and it looks like he senses this and hence feels he can take it away from you. What range of hands could he be on? I think a check raise from him would have come before the river if he had hit his set, most likely on the turn. The board is too wet on the turn for him to risk a smooth call with a set. So can take that out of the equation. 10-9 possible? Again, I feel he check raises the turn with this hand. What you would be afraid of here is the bigger flush. If he has that, gg and well done to him. Call the river for me. There is probably alot in his range that you would beat to justify a call - his entire bluff range plus J10, Q10, K10, A10. His range is player dependent but you did say he is capable of making big bluffs.

 

[checkraiseulite]

I prefer the flop cbet to follow on from your pre 3bet to rep strength. The level they play live at crown, you immediately telling your opponent that you are weak with a check on the flop here with a flush draw out there. You have plenty of equity in the hand to not be afraid of the check raise on the flop. You continue to keep him guessing whether or not you have overpair with flop cbet. You then can decide what to do on the turn, but free card to river would be nice. A bet on flop would also raise chances of check behind from him on the turn thus allowing you to go to the river.

I would call the river bet here. You underrepped your hand flop onwards and it looks like he senses this and hence feels he can take it away from you. What range of hands could he be on? I think a check raise from him would have come before the river if he had hit his set, most likely on the turn. The board is too wet on the turn for him to risk a smooth call with a set. So can take that out of the equation. 10-9 possible? Again, I feel he check raises the turn with this hand. What you would be afraid of here is the bigger flush. If he has that, gg and well done to him. Call the river for me. There is probably alot in his range that you would beat to justify a call - his entire bluff range plus J10, Q10, K10, A10. His range is player dependent but you did say he is capable of making big bluffs.

FYI: I am in position here, I can take a free river card if I want, instead I go for a delayed cbet after he checks for the second time.

Hypothetically if I bet the flop, the problem is what do I do when I get checkraised here given stack sizes and his check-raising range? This player can and will checkraise in spots like this if he senses weakness.

Say I cbet flop to $135 and villain check-raises me to $400. Am I shipping here with 6 high? Or am I calling and folding to $750 on non spade/3 turns? obv I have flopped some decent equity but what is my equity like against his c/r range even recognising that it will be comprised of at least some combos of complete air?

I agree with your logic when factoring in 100bb stacks. But 250+bb with 6high? What is he calling with?

Checking it back here I think is good.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

FYI: I am in position here, I can take a free river card if I want, instead I go for a delayed cbet after he checks for the second time.

Hypothetically if I bet the flop, the problem is what do I do when I get checkraised here given stack sizes and his check-raising range?

Say I cbet flop to $135 and villain check-raises me to $400. Am I shipping here with 6 high? Or am I calling and folding to $750 on non spade/3 turns? obv I have flopped some decent equity but what is my equity like against his c/r range even recognising that it will be comprised of at least some combos of complete air?

I agree with your logic when factoring in 100bb stacks. But 250+bb with 6high? What is he calling with?

Checking it back here I think is good.

I can def see your logic, but I still believe if you run through every possible scenario, you are making money in this spot by firing on the flop.

Being the initial aggressor pre flop, you have to bet a straight flush draw in position and continue to take control of the pot. More times than not villain hasn't got a piece of that board, he folds, you win 20bbs.

If villain check-calls, it's not the end of the world as you have 12 outs, and can outplay villain on later streets, or make your hand.

If villain check-raises, ( which is probably going to be less than 3 times in 10 there from your description and my own experience), well then you have a decision. Sometimes villain will check raise with air, you come over the top and win an even bigger pot. Sometimes villain check-raises with an over pair, you come over the top and either push him off his hand, or are in a flip. All those are good scenarios for you.

Very worst case scenario is you come over the top of his check-raise when he has a set, or a higher flush draw. Even when he has a set you are not in that bad shape. If he has a higher fd, then it's a cooler. Both those are worst case scenarios and are pretty rare though.

I would c-bet it 100% of the time, and if villain check-raises, I would ship it 100% of the time.

Imo you are burning money not betting the flop. If you 3 bet with 6 high, and flop a sfd, you have to bet after villain checks to you on the flop. Most times you win 20bbs there and then if you c-bet regardless of the board anyway.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

Hey checkraiseulite, what happened with that hand? I'm curious!

 

[checkraiseulite]

I posted the results last night but deleted them b/c I wanted perhaps a couple of different perspectives from people who may not see 2/5 as the cheeseburgers!

I ended up calling and he just had the naked A:spade:.

I guess he figured I couldn't call without 99/910 (discounting 22 and 44) KQs/QJs and was folding everything else.