taking different lines in poker

[stormswa]

this thread here got me to thinking https://www.cardschat.com/forum/tournament-hand-analysis-51/why-hell-90656/

no offense dexter but it fits this discussion, and latley I have been a total tool so thought I would actually make a thread that has a good chance of turning into a good discussion. So back to what this thread is about, the different lines we take in hands plays a big part in wether we will get a call or not on flop/turn/river.

Now in this thread above I dont think villian put too much thought into dexter's line because its a freeroll and usually those players have no clue what they are doing. But our lines we take during hands can play a huge roll in if we get a call or not. Sometimes it is best to take a weird line in a hand because it will cause our opponents to make questionable calls that honestly we want. Take this for instance, we are dealt something like AK and we make standard 3-5 BB raise and we flop something like AQx, now our normal line would be to bet this to give draws improper odds to call and to protect our hand.

I like to offer a different decision and say check your TPTK and give opponent time to think his 2nd or 3rd pair might be good. Plus this gives more chance our opponents will just call down if we lead out turn and river. This is even better when we get a flop like Axx and a Q turns and our opponent calls down with a hand like QJ. Most players know the line that is supposed to be taken in poker and because of this we have to start playing our hands a little differently. The online poker player is getting smarter and reading and learning to adapt to our playing style so we need to play stuff differently to keep them guessing.

please feel free to discuss.

 

[rainsoaked]

I like to offer a different decision and say check your TPTK and give opponent time to think his 2nd or 3rd pair might be good. Plus this gives more chance our opponents will just call down if we lead out turn and river. This is even better when we get a flop like Axx and a Q turns and our opponent calls down with a hand like QJ. Most players know the line that is supposed to be taken in poker and because of this we have to start playing our hands a little differently. The online poker player is getting smarter and reading and learning to adapt to our playing style so we need to play stuff differently to keep them guessing.

please feel free to discuss.

I like this line of thinking against one opponent. The risk of letting in a draw is still there but I wouldn't be afraid to re-pop if he decides to bet the flop instead of checking behind. But if he calls down turn and river, are we not really sure where we are until the cards flip up? Does it matter? I mean, how big is the risk of giving opponent control of the hand (even if it's meant to be temporary) when we check the flop? These may be silly questions. I'm just wondering since I do take this line occasionally.​

 

[stormswa]

I like this line of thinking against one opponent. The risk of letting in a draw is still there but I wouldn't be afraid to re-pop if he decides to bet the flop instead of checking behind. But if he calls down turn and river, are we not really sure where we are until the cards flip up? Does it matter? I mean, how big is the risk of giving opponent control of the hand (even if it's meant to be temporary) when we check the flop? These may be silly questions. I'm just wondering since I do take this line occasionally.​

this line of thinking is fine if you are able to lay down strong hands, if you are not then I really dont suggest taking the passive line. Giving opponent control of the hand gives him multiple chances to bluff you out of a pot. I know there is one very good player on this forum that likes playing the loose/aggressive/passive line which I always thought was weak but after thinking about it i dont mind it now.

 

[rainsoaked]

Good point about being able to lay it down. Of course I would like to think I wouldn't go broke here but it's a fine line. Is what you're talking about in the op pretty much in line with WA/WB? I hope more folks come in because I'd like a discussion about different lines vs the evolution of online poker/players. Trends like the re-steal and the re-re-steal and UTG (+1, +2) as the new button, etc. These could be old news, I guess. But I didn't get the memo

 

[stormswa]

no if we figure we are behind we just want to get rid of our hand, what we are doing is giving villain a chance to bluff, called inducing a bluff. We are letting draws try to bluff us out on their draws and people running hands like KQ a chance to catch up and then overplay their 2nd or 3rd pairs. It looks like we are giving villain total control of the hand and we are to a degree but we are also trying to control the size of the pot.

if on the flop we think there is a chance we are behind then we don't want to just call but we want to raise to gain the information and then see how he reacts.

 

[rainsoaked]

You explained this in a nice and patient way that I can easily understand. Thank you. I'm working on talking more about poker instead of just thinking it so I'm bound to be saying plenty of laughable things for the next little while. Or long while...Anyway, just wanted to say I appreciate it.

 

[Stick66]

You explained this in a nice and patient way that I can easily understand. Thank you. I'm working on talking more about poker instead of just thinking it so I'm bound to be saying plenty of laughable things for the next little while. Or long while...Anyway, just wanted to say I appreciate it.

I noticed the patience and pleasantry, as well. Good job, Stormy-kins. +rep

 

[skoldpadda]

From resident jerk, to worst loyaler. You're moving up in the world!

I like to vary my play and take that line as well (20-30%) checking TPTK to make the villain more likely to dump some chips my way. Works really well against weaker players especially and those playing ace rag who will check the flop to see if anyone else declares an ace.

 

[Irexes]

I like to offer a different decision and say check your TPTK and give opponent time to think his 2nd or 3rd pair might be good. Plus this gives more chance our opponents will just call down if we lead out turn and river.

My view is still that the majority of players with AK will check a flop of Axx or Kxx or at least view it as the standard play still. Others will make a small bet (ie 1/4 of the pot or less because they are afraid of making a proper bet ). I still think despite all the literature meaning that people should be aware of it, that the best way to disguise your AK or AQ on an Axx flop is to make a solid bet. I'm talking $33-55 n MTTs here, which are still mainly occupied by weak players.

If however you are looking to build a big pot then perhaps checking is the way to go. This assumes that you are against an aggressive player or one who makes c-bets. It is however the riskier play and is compounded if the board is in anyway co-ordinated ie two of a suit or AJx, AKx, AQx or even ATx. In this case betting (and denying odds to the draw) usually brings along the guy with KJ, KQ etc or four to the flush incorrectly. Checking and then seeing the board get worse (AKxT, AQxJ etc or the flush) can either put your opponent ahead or at best dry up the action as when you bet they are more likely to fold if they have nothing to do with the board. So I'd make this play more often if I was in some form of trouble with my stack or my opponent is shortstacked or hyper-aggressive.

Essentially with Axx you are either picking up a continuation bet from your opponent with 88-KK or nothing at all unless they have a worse kicker and can't let go, in which case bingo (but then they are calling a bet anyway).

If you bet out you also have the opportunity to spot the sets as they will often reraise or at least give you indication you may need to slow up.

This is even better when we get a flop like Axx and a Q turns and our opponent calls down with a hand like QJ.

In a freeroll or very low-buy in perhaps, but you're not getting many fish on the hook if you raise or call a raise preflop and then check an Axx flop and wake up on the turn at most levels.

I'm all for different lines, but Axx with AK/Q is a hard hand to extract a big pot from unless stacks are really short relative to the blinds.


I would add that there is a world of difference between AK/Q and a Axx flop and AK and a Kxx flop and AQ and Qxx flop. They are chalk, cheese and something else beginning with c and all need very different approaches and strengths assinging to them. I would also say that position is absolutely paramount in how to play after the flop as if you are last rather than first to act you can fake a c-bet, particularly if you are like me and bet pretty much every flop regardless

 

[joosebuck]

have to be aware of flop textures and opponents aggression factor to do this successfully. a passive opponent will call you down anyway, and doing it on a board of something like TJ7 with 2 clubs is usually not smart

 

[stormswa]

good post rex I didnt get time to read all through it I need to go to bed double at work tomorrow I will look at it later this week so I can really respong but didnt take much concideration in my examples.

 

[tenbob]

Nice thread Storm, and its a decent concept to use against mainly decent unaware players. Im starting to find, especially im MTTs that betting the turn is just as good as c-betting the flop in lots of weird situations. Gotta agree with Rex though, if i call a pre-flop raise with a decent but not great hand, ill be more aware of calling a c-bet, and a little more wary of calling a turn one, and if someone does it to me ill usually have either made my hand or be folding, even if i make a stab at the pot.

This could have some more applications to deep stacked nl ring games against thinking opponents for occasional use though. Again a strong player will pick up on this and use it to call pre-flop raises with you with a good chance of seeing a free turn as well as flop.

 

[aliengenius]

My view is still that the majority of players with AK will check a flop of Axx or Kxx or at least view it as the standard play still. Others will make a small bet (ie 1/4 of the pot or less because they are afraid of making a proper bet ). I still think despite all the literature meaning that people should be aware of it, that the best way to disguise your AK or AQ on an Axx flop is to make a solid bet. I'm talking $33-55 n MTTs here, which are still mainly occupied by weak players.

If however you are looking to build a big pot then perhaps checking is the way to go. This assumes that you are against an aggressive player or one who makes c-bets. It is however the riskier play and is compounded if the board is in anyway co-ordinated ie two of a suit or AJx, AKx, AQx or even ATx. In this case betting (and denying odds to the draw) usually brings along the guy with KJ, KQ etc or four to the flush incorrectly. Checking and then seeing the board get worse (AKxT, AQxJ etc or the flush) can either put your opponent ahead or at best dry up the action as when you bet they are more likely to fold if they have nothing to do with the board. So I'd make this play more often if I was in some form of trouble with my stack or my opponent is shortstacked or hyper-aggressive.

Essentially with Axx you are either picking up a continuation bet from your opponent with 88-KK or nothing at all unless they have a worse kicker and can't let go, in which case bingo (but then they are calling a bet anyway).

If you bet out you also have the opportunity to spot the sets as they will often reraise or at least give you indication you may need to slow up.



In a freeroll or very low-buy in perhaps, but you're not getting many fish on the hook if you raise or call a raise preflop and then check an Axx flop and wake up on the turn at most levels.

I'm all for different lines, but Axx with AK/Q is a hard hand to extract a big pot from unless stacks are really short relative to the blinds.


I would add that there is a world of difference between AK/Q and a Axx flop and AK and a Kxx flop and AQ and Qxx flop. They are chalk, cheese and something else beginning with c and all need very different approaches and strengths assinging to them. I would also say that position is absolutely paramount in how to play after the flop as if you are last rather than first to act you can fake a c-bet, particularly if you are like me and bet pretty much every flop regardless

^^^this.

Also, one big problem with a passive approach is that you don't get any information. Sure you might be inducing a bluff, but you might also be calling down w tptk when the guy has you beat, or you might not be getting the value you could by driving the betting yourself (if opponent will call down with worse kicker).

 

[Shandy]

Very nice discussion, i have recently been trying the passive post flop tactic, and it has been working quite well for me, of course i am not doing it every hand i play, but where the situation dictates passive play i will. I don't think that it just has to be done with a hand as good as TPTK, and can be quite effective even with second pair, especially when that second pair is in your hand.
Now people are saying, but if you don't bet out you don't know where you are in the hand, but how valuable is this information really, if you bet out with AK on an AJ4 rainbow board and get called- what do you really know- basically nothing, his hand could still be any A, any J, any 4, any PP, 10Q, KQ, any set or 2 pair, now if he raises, do we lay down TPTK because only 2 pair or a set would raise, but then wouldn't AQ raise here, or even any A or KK, QQ, 1010 to check if it was a continuation bet, so the only thing we really find out when we bet out is that he had absolutely nothing because he folds and was probably drawing to runner runner, so would we not be better letting him take a stab at the pot, and check raising either the flop or turn, this way our hand looks a lot stronger, and although commits quite a few more chips, does give us a much better idea of his hand and gets more chips into the pot when you are way ahead.

Don't know if that is really comprehensible- will maybe try and find a few example hands i have played recently.

ps- not meaning to be sexist referring to villian as he all the time, just can't be bothered putting he/she every time

 

[Threads13]

^^^this.

Also, one big problem with a passive approach is that you don't get any information. Sure you might be inducing a bluff, but you might also be calling down w tptk when the guy has you beat, or you might not be getting the value you could by driving the betting yourself (if opponent will call down with worse kicker).

This is true but it is often overrated. For example, if you bet the flop and are called what information do you have? It isn't that much difference than them betting. If you can lay down TPTK because you think your opponent would only bet 3 streets with a better hand then it really isn't sacrificing a whole bunch at all. A lot of times opponents will bet hands that they will not call with and in that case it is actually better to c/c.

I do agree with deception but it is important to apply it properly. You have to know that your opponent actually is paying attention which isn't always the case in the age of 12-tabling.