lakeoffire says

If you were the MP, against a player like yourself and the scary river card comes. Do you...1. value bet and fold to a push? 2. Check and be forced to call a bet? 3. Check and fold?

04/07/07

EdmondDantes says

First of all, here's to 2+2 being down! May it happen more often, so we can see more of your stuff and get some work done ourselves!

I think there's real merit in tearing apart these limped pot hands and using them to sharpen hand reading skills. When they progress to the river with action, they often result in large pots, awkward decisions and someone putting in a pile of money dead. As for this particular one, it's interesting and one in which, it's really helpful to know if your opponent is a thinking player. You obviously know villain has a real monster from his call of your flop raise--that board leaves a lot of hands vulnerable with two cards to come for him to just call here with anything less than the flopped nuts with improvement potential. If he's good and has an over-pair, he's folding; a set or a flopped straight, he's probably 4-betting; a flush draw (6h7h, for example), he's maybe calling (380 to him with pot = 120+60+120+600+the possibility of stacking you) or possibly shoving. With the hand he has (6h5h), the hand he's really worried about YOU having is a set here, yes? If you have the nut flush draw, he's a 3 to 1 favorite to the river since he holds some of your outs, but only 2 to 1 to the set.

I actually don't mind his flop call if his intention is to bet a non-scary turn hard and ruin your drawing odds. As you describe, though, his turn check is more awful than unorthodox and gives you the opportunity to improve for free, in this case, a bummer. When you check the turn behind, though, doesn't it actually widen the range of hands he can put you on? From his perspective, you showed strength on the flop, he's checked to you on the turn and you showed weakness behind. To me, that says flush draw, two pair or set (attempting to control pot size) and reduces the possibility of you holding a straight, although A5x is a possibility. The point is, given your turn check, I'm not convinced his river bet was an obvious poor play. He did make a flush here, and a flush is a pretty good hand. Once you shove, it's pretty likely he's beat since he's got the worst possible flush and this doesn't seem like a good bluffing opportunity for you, but he's getting, what, 3 to 1 on his call? I call there and spend the next 30 minutes surfing the web for a new monitor.

In any event, I think it's really instructive to break down these limped hands and recognize that pretty much everything is vulnerable in a limped pot. Here he flops a great hand with improvement potential, but that improvement turns out to be a disaster. Bottom line, without superior hand reading skills and folding discipline, it seems like slow-playing monsters in limped pots has a ton of downside. To me, the flaw in his hand reading was not giving you credit on the turn for a hand you could play to the river. Your flop play pretty much screamed "Let's do it!" and his turn play should acknowledge that. If you get there, you get there, but at least he's got most of his money in ahead. I, for one, would feel a lot better about that (as the villain), than slow-playing, letting you beat me and then getting most of my stack in 100% wrong. Put differently, if I'm going to make mistakes (a given), I'd rather make the mistake of misreading your 3-bet range on the flop and chasing you off a good, but not great hand with a turn bet, than letting your good hand turn into the nuts and take the majority of my stack dead.

That's just my $.02. Feel free to shatter my ego and thinking. And thanks again for another thoughtful post.

Edmond

P.S. FPS = fancy play syndrome?

04/07/07

Adanthar says

This particular pot is a little different from most because I can't really have 2 pair (maybe exactly 43s sometimes with that many limpers, but that's about it.) So my range is big flush draw (not just any FD, as I probably fold mediocre draws), set, straight. Once in a while I will show up with an overpair or something funky like 54 no hearts, but they put $0 in the pot after he calls unless I improve so they're irrelevant. (I could also have 5h4h here, but obviously not in this hand.)

Regardless, after he calls, I check something like 90% of the time on a turn brick. The only thing he can be sure of after I check behind is that I *probably* don't have a straight. It's a very bad situation for him to be in vs. any scare card on the river because he can't really 'value bet' less than a push, and a push is relatively thin. (Vs. the real top pros, these types of pots lead to very screwed up river action, with hands like 22 or even total bluffs shoving trying to get 44 to fold. Fortunately, we don't need to worry about that level.) But he really can't check/fold (I mean, come on, I'm not checking 44 behind twice, nor am I necessarily checking A5 behind just because the board paired on the river when he checks) and a check/call feels much weaker than it actually is. It's a sick spot.

04/07/07

Chooose an identity

Login/Register Enter Name Anonymous

Log in with your TwoRags.com account. Click here to register. Email: Password: Remember log-in information Name:

Since 2+2 is down today, I want to post this today to get some writing practice in, heh.

In my last post, I talked about the importance of knowing when to take an unorthodox line. When the typical decent player thing to do with a set is to raise, it's typical for a reason - it probably makes the most money against a generic opponent with a generic range in that spot. Therefore, when you call instead of raising, you should have a hunch that something is different this time; perhaps he seems weak, raising will be too obvious, he's way ahead or way behind on a scary board...it doesn't particularly matter as long as you have a good read. When it becomes important to vary your play, you should always rely on your hand reading to tell you when to do so.

In today's session, I wound up playing only one truly big pot. After a few limpers in the previously mentioned 10/20 game, I limped in the cutoff with A 8 and a $2100 stack. Six of us saw a 4 3 2 flop with 120-ish in the pot. Three people checked, an MP limper with $2700 bet half the pot, and an LP shortstack with $600 total minraised his bet. MP and I have a fairly long history in this game; I feel he's too loose and makes a lot of mistakes with deep stacks, but outplays the generic bad LAG's/calling stations and is definitely a winner. I had no history with the shortstack, but assume(d) him to be terrible.

[My flop decision is not what I want to focus on, but it's tangentially interesting enough to spend a paragraph on. This is a fairly breakeven spot - although it looks like you might have 15 outs+, you probably have around 12-13 on average at this point, maybe a little more. The times you're against something a set+ are somewhat balanced out by the times the shortstack has a smaller flush draw, but when you wind up all in with him, on average, you're probably around a 40-45% dog, and shortstacks simply don't fold enough after raising for there to be a lot of dead money. In other words, in a vacuum, you could go ahead and fold here. However, this is the perfect spot to camouflage your play with the nuts - you are never going to be that large a dog, you're up against someone with only 30 BB, and when you show the hand down, people will be forced to give you action when you have monsters. So, if you ever need to play draws aggressively, this is the type of hand where you should do it.]

Obviously, after the last paragraph, I went ahead and raised. I could've bumped the shortstack's $120 raise to 300 or so, but decided I'd rather just put him all in (the same line I'd take with 44 there) and made it exactly 600. I gave no thought to MP because, frankly, he should fold 99% of the time...except he took 10 seconds, went ahead and called. The shortstack thought forever but finally folded, and the two of us saw the Q turn. MP took ten seconds again and checked to me...

Let's pause here. This is a line that is often posted on 2+2 MSNL - someone flops a monster OOP, there is significant action behind, and every party involved knows that the OOP player has a monster whether he calls or 4 bets. The standard reply, for a number of reasons, is to go ahead and shove on the flop. Should MP have done that? I think it's probably the best line for 33 or better, but in fairness, I would likely call with my big draw regardless, and if he knew what I held, he should have called and shoved a safe turn. The second line is unorthodox, but given my hand range to make that 3 bet, it makes a certain amount of sense. What *doesn't* work is the c/c, check line that he took, because it's so painfully obvious he has a monster that my threshold for betting (remember we both have just over a PSB left on the turn) is somewhere between 33 and A5. Therefore, he gives lots of free cards to a range of (big draw, set+), a very dangerous proposition.

I obviously checked behind (after tanking a bit to make sure he wouldn't automatically put me on a draw) and fortunately got my 9 on the river. MP now thought a bit and led 700, just over half of our effective stacks. I obviously shoved with the nuts and he called after thinking a little while.

Before I say what he had, can you think of a hand that it makes sense for him to bet that amount with vs. my range on the river? The answer is 'none'. If I had a big draw, either I missed with something like 54, or made the nuts. If I had a set, perhaps I would check behind when the heart hit, but I don't think many people are capable of folding 44 to a shove in that spot/nobody folds a straight in that spot to a ~PSB AI under any circumstances, and I can't really put him on a flush myself. Furthermore, he almost has to call a shove with everything except 22 and maybe 33...so this bet doesn't work as a blocking bet, and it's not a good value bet, either. It's an example of FPS - a reluctant admission that he should probably bet, but no real idea how to maximize value or minimize loss. In fact, vs the range he expects me to have, he's probably about equally well off checking or shoving.

When the cards were turned over, MP held 6 5, for the flopped nuts with a big redraw. This must have been a very tempting hand to slowplay with, but misjudging my range and my ability to read his hand made it a very costly idea.