$2 NLHE 6-max: Spew, missed value, or well played?

[BluffMeAllIn]

PokerStars - $0.02 Ante $0.01 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (BTN): 254 BB
SB: 254.5 BB (VPIP: 23.05, PFR: 11.70, 3Bet Preflop: 5.36, hands: 875)
BB: 365.5 BB (VPIP: 31.72, PFR: 4.73, 3Bet Preflop: 1.82, Hands: 1,025)
UTG: 420.5 BB (VPIP: 37.96, PFR: 37.04, 3Bet Preflop: 19.51, Hands: 108)
MP: 383 BB (VPIP: 29.07, PFR: 14.34, 3Bet Preflop: 5.56, Hands: 265)
CO: 323 BB (VPIP: 17.95, PFR: 12.82, 3Bet Preflop: 10.00, Hands: 315)

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB, 6 players post ante of 0.5 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 4.5 BB) Hero has J:spade: J:club:

fold, MP raises to 3 BB, fold, Hero raises to 9 BB, fold, fold, MP calls 6 BB

Flop: (22.5 BB, 2 players) K:club: 5:spade: 6:heart:
MP checks, Hero checks

Turn: (22.5 BB, 2 players) 2:heart:
MP bets 10.5 BB, Hero calls 10.5 BB

River: (43.5 BB, 2 players) 4:heart:
MP bets 21 BB, Hero raises to 85 BB

 

[akaRobbo]

His half pot bets really make me think he doesn't have a K. I think the river play is fine, would have obviously liked a non heart river card but I think middle pairs call us since our line looks so bluffy.

 

[DonV73]

That half pot turn bet is confusing, but since he is betting again on the river ,out of position, makes me think he does have hit at least a pair of Kings, or maybe trip 5's or 6's. He could have even had something like KQhh imo.
Personally I would have just called his river bet.

 

[atlantafalcons0]

Cbet flop, maybe double barrel turn, slow down on river.

 

[c9h13no3]

Played perfect until you spew-bombed the river. Betting this flop is really bad.

 

[atlantafalcons0]

Played perfect until you spew-bombed the river. Betting this flop is really bad.

Tossing out a c-bet on an uncoordinated board with one big card and two little cards is really bad?

 

[c9h13no3]

What calls on that board that JJ beats? It's a WA/WB spot.

 

[duggs]

Tossing out a c-bet on an uncoordinated board with one big card and two little cards is really bad?

yup its really bad on this texture, with this hand.

 

[BluffMeAllIn]

thx for the feedback, but yeah I basically turned my hand into a bluff on the river to fold out tp hands.

Probably a bit spewy since i have sd value but when he bet turn and then river it weighed towards tp and so much came in on the river I felt I could rep to easily push him off tp hands.

 

[Aces2w1n]

Remember at this level people don't know how to fold top pair

 

[BluffMeAllIn]

vil folded

 

[DrazaFFT]

I usually cbet all my 3bet hands, and i usually cbet Kxx Axx flops, can someone explain more deeply why is it bad to cbet here... Duggs???
As played turn bet seems like an autobet, i would call it and i would most probably bluff catch river, dont like raise much...

 

[duggs]

I usually cbet all my 3bet hands, and i usually cbet Kxx Axx flops, can someone explain more deeply why is it bad to cbet here... Duggs???
As played turn bet seems like an autobet, i would call it and i would most probably bluff catch river, dont like raise much...

because if you cbet your middling hands you bloat the pot against hands that have us crushed and fold out the hands we beat. checking takes us one street closer to showdown and allows villain to potentially bluff

 

[EvertonGirl]

because if you cbet your middling hands you bloat the pot against hands that have us crushed and fold out the hands we beat. checking takes us one street closer to showdown and allows villain to potentially bluff

Is this just for cash games or also applies to tourney?

I had a similar situation when I had 77 and I OR and got 1 caller. There was a king on the flop can't remember the other cards, I cbet and villain folded. I like to take the initiative. I do this more often when I am against a passive player.

 

[duggs]

Is this just for cash games or also applies to tourney?

I had a similar situation when I had 77 and I OR and got 1 caller. There was a king on the flop can't remember the other cards, I cbet and villain folded. I like to take the initiative. I do this more often when I am against a passive player.

the same concepts apply, your sizing will just differ because of sizing, its also important to note that ranges matter,

Betting 77 on K25 blind v blind is dramatically different from betting KK on A94 in a 3bet pot. because the range construction is different. 77 is a value bet in the former and KK is a classic WA/WB in the latter. remember this is a 3bet pot, which means hand ranges are more defined than a single raised pot.

If we divide an opponents range into hands that beat ours and and hands that don't (not true range v range but definitely true for JJ) if betting gets called by all of the first type but none of the 2nd type, we shouldn't bet, we should check and let him bluff, if he bluff too much we call, if he doesn't we fold. when he bluffs too much we make money from bluff catching, if he doesn't bluff enough then we make money when he checks down a bluff candidate and we win. both scenarios are preferable to betting, where we put in an additional bet into the pot against only the hands that beat us.

there are also cases where we can bet for protection, which is more prevalent in tournaments due to smaller sizing, making someone fold their two over cards or 6 out draws can be valuable but thats a separate tangent.

there can be exceptions and caveats to the above but yea

 

[EvertonGirl]

the same concepts apply, your sizing will just differ because of sizing, its also important to note that ranges matter,

Betting 77 on K25 blind v blind is dramatically different from betting KK on A94 in a 3bet pot. because the range construction is different. 77 is a value bet in the former and KK is a classic WA/WB in the latter. remember this is a 3bet pot, which means hand ranges are more defined than a single raised pot.

If we divide an opponents range into hands that beat ours and and hands that don't (not true range v range but definitely true for JJ) if betting gets called by all of the first type but none of the 2nd type, we shouldn't bet, we should check and let him bluff, if he bluff too much we call, if he doesn't we fold. when he bluffs too much we make money from bluff catching, if he doesn't bluff enough then we make money when he checks down a bluff candidate and we win. both scenarios are preferable to betting, where we put in an additional bet into the pot against only the hands that beat us.

there are also cases where we can bet for protection, which is more prevalent in tournaments due to smaller sizing, making someone fold their two over cards or 6 out draws can be valuable but thats a separate tangent.

there can be exceptions and caveats to the above but yea

That is more the likely why I am making mistakes then, I thought if you are the 3better you are taking the initiative pre so you should try and take the initiative post flop and if you just called the 3bet then you c/r or c/f.

In one of the sats I played in the MM this year, I had a WA/WB situation when I OR with AA and get a 3bet which I call. The flop contained a Q and my bet was raised, this is where I made the made the mistake by shoving... Just couldn't fold those aces, even though my head was saying hes got queens If I had played it passively, I could of got away from it and saved myself all my chips. That was a lesson learned.

 

[atlantafalcons0]

the same concepts apply, your sizing will just differ because of sizing, its also important to note that ranges matter,

Betting 77 on K25 blind v blind is dramatically different from betting KK on A94 in a 3bet pot. because the range construction is different. 77 is a value bet in the former and KK is a classic WA/WB in the latter. remember this is a 3bet pot, which means hand ranges are more defined than a single raised pot.

If we divide an opponents range into hands that beat ours and and hands that don't (not true range v range but definitely true for JJ) if betting gets called by all of the first type but none of the 2nd type, we shouldn't bet, we should check and let him bluff, if he bluff too much we call, if he doesn't we fold. when he bluffs too much we make money from bluff catching, if he doesn't bluff enough then we make money when he checks down a bluff candidate and we win. both scenarios are preferable to betting, where we put in an additional bet into the pot against only the hands that beat us.

there are also cases where we can bet for protection, which is more prevalent in tournaments due to smaller sizing, making someone fold their two over cards or 6 out draws can be valuable but thats a separate tangent.

there can be exceptions and caveats to the above but yea

This is ****ing gold!!!

 

[duggs]

That is more the likely why I am making mistakes then, I thought if you are the 3better you are taking the initiative pre so you should try and take the initiative post flop and if you just called the 3bet then you c/r or c/f.

In one of the sats I played in the MM this year, I had a WA/WB situation when I OR with AA and get a 3bet which I call. The flop contained a Q and my bet was raised, this is where I made the made the mistake by shoving... Just couldn't fold those aces, even though my head was saying hes got queens If I had played it passively, I could of got away from it and saved myself all my chips. That was a lesson learned.

well, generally speaking thats what typically happens because the stronger range should do all or most of the betting, which is typically the uncapped one pre flop (which is the one that put in the last raise.) however this isn't true on all textures. for example 9TJ connects with a 3b/calling range better than a 4betting range with deeper stacks.

regarding your AA hand, why didn't you 4bet? and why did you lead? this hand certainly isn't WA/WB.

WA/WB stands for way ahead/way behind, so it only occurs when we have a bluff catcher v an essentially polarised range. the optimal solution to the PvBC game is for the bluff catchers to never bet, and the Polarised range does all the betting.

 

[duggs]

This is ****ing gold!!!

glad you liked it, happy to expand on anything if its unclear

 

[John A]

because if you cbet your middling hands you bloat the pot against hands that have us crushed and fold out the hands we beat. checking takes us one street closer to showdown and allows villain to potentially bluff

Mmm... I'd caveat this because it really depends on your opponent and limit you're playing. I'm too lazy to read the whole thread and maybe this has already been said, but I don't mind c-betting this board vs some regs at mid stakes, but I'd check a larger potion of the time than I would in a single raised pot. And honestly, I'll bet against most of the better regs, and check vs weaker regs and bluff / bomb happy players.

At 2NL though, I think you're going to slightly tighter pre-flop calls, but much loser post flop calls, even in 3-bet pots. And on top of that, you can really control and manipulate the pot however you want to induce worse hands to call w/o much fear of being moved off your hand.

For example, I guarantee you all small pairs are calling this 3-bet, and calling a flop bet. Where if you check, and 2 over cards come on the turn, like a Q or A, none of those hands are calling the turn.

Nothing is static though, so those who are learning (well we're all learning), but earlier on their poker journey, I'd advise betting the flop 1/2 potish sizing. You can probably get 2 streets of value vs worse hands at this level on that kind of board honestly.

 

[hffjd2000]

The action would have changed if you bet on flop and represents something.

On the turn, we would somehow know where we stand.

 

[DrazaFFT]

This thread turned into a pretty nice discussion. Thanks for the detailed explanation @duggs, i enjoyed reading it.

 

[BluffMeAllIn]

This thread turned into a pretty nice discussion. Thanks for the detailed explanation @duggs, i enjoyed reading it.

Agree, every little bit of discussion and expansion always helps even if its just for reassurance or refresher.

Thanks again everyone for the input.

 

[duggs]

Mmm... I'd caveat this because it really depends on your opponent and limit you're playing. I'm too lazy to read the whole thread and maybe this has already been said, but I don't mind c-betting this board vs some regs at mid stakes, but I'd check a larger potion of the time than I would in a single raised pot. And honestly, I'll bet against most of the better regs, and check vs weaker regs and bluff / bomb happy players.

At 2NL though, I think you're going to slightly tighter pre-flop calls, but much loser post flop calls, even in 3-bet pots. And on top of that, you can really control and manipulate the pot however you want to induce worse hands to call w/o much fear of being moved off your hand.

For example, I guarantee you all small pairs are calling this 3-bet, and calling a flop bet. Where if you check, and 2 over cards come on the turn, like a Q or A, none of those hands are calling the turn.

Nothing is static though, so those who are learning (well we're all learning), but earlier on their poker journey, I'd advise betting the flop 1/2 potish sizing. You can probably get 2 streets of value vs worse hands at this level on that kind of board honestly.

unless you are able to value bet this why would you opt to bet this v the better regs at midstakes?

regarding bolded, isn't that exactly what checking entails? we get to deleverage out opponent by getting a street closer to showdown, we get an informational advantage from their next action. Are you tripling this for value? because personally I'm only betting 2 streets at most and they will be turn and river, A/Q are particularly bad cards to extract value on, but the flip side is that the fish is one bet closer to showdown on the turn and thus more likely to call.

 

[EvertonGirl]

well, generally speaking thats what typically happens because the stronger range should do all or most of the betting, which is typically the uncapped one pre flop (which is the one that put in the last raise.) however this isn't true on all textures. for example 9TJ connects with a 3b/calling range better than a 4betting range with deeper stacks.

regarding your AA hand, why didn't you 4bet? and why did you lead? this hand certainly isn't WA/WB.

WA/WB stands for way ahead/way behind, so it only occurs when we have a bluff catcher v an essentially polarised range. the optimal solution to the PvBC game is for the bluff catchers to never bet, and the Polarised range does all the betting.

I believe I wrote how I played this hand wrong, if i remember correctly I did 4 bet and said to Ron maybe I should of 4bet shoved, which he told me... No you played it correct pre we don't want him to fold here. I will look for the hand to check, I am sure now that I did 4bet. I am scatter brain at times.

I thought I could either be WA or WB, obviously being WB if he had QQ's, which he did. Thanks for clearing it up for me