I'd raise less pre. Not sure how deep we are on the turn? Depending on the button, I might use this hand to x/c twice and maximise value vs floats. This hand has excellent playability across all rivers. As played, unless we're incredibly short. I think call turn has to be better. We have better hands in our range that will take this line, too. 33, 88, KK, KQ, Q8s and AK. I get we have equity, but there's no reason to just shove.
stack sizes are important. with his turn minraise you need 15% equity to call and you have at least 18%. he won't call your shove with worse so call turn and see river.
your sizing pre sets the stage for having 45% of your stack in with turn call. smaller bets pre and on flop perhaps would have made you feel less committed and resist the urge to shove.
3xing is bad stick to sub 2.5, min-2.2 seems to be a nice range to keep around. 1800 on flop, 40-50% on the turn and once villain minclicks its soulread time. Sets probably raises on the flop, but he could slowplay them. The only probable twopair is KQ and the K does also give many Qx combos additional straight draws but seems weird to go bananas on this bad card. Conclusion is that you might probably still have the best hand considering the board.
I would never 3bet shove turn you are too deep and it does not make much sense at all, call and evaluate on the river.
Not trying to act as a professor (because I'm far from one, poker-wise), but the turn action, re-raising all-in to "take advantage of the fold equity" is a pretty common mistake.
We have a strong flush-draw and we are so accustomed to raise these that we do not think twice about what we are actually trying to accompish.
Raising with a strong draw is usually an attempt to maximize value by bluffing out better hands. The focus is on the word "bluff". That's how you take advantage of fold equity. It is a semi-bluff. You're not trying to get value yet, but fold out better hands.
What OP did by getting it in on the turn is not a bluff. Indeed, we have a made hand that can actually redraw in case we are beaten on the turn. On the turn, we bet for value, not as a bluff.
The amount of hands that beat us that we get to fold by getting it in on the turn is very very limited. (added to that, the need to protect our hand is pretty slim against hands that we beat at that point)
The only thing we achieve is getting more money in against the hands that actually beat us already.
The only hands I can see where it is beneficial for us are one pair-hands with two hearts and the ace of hearts. In that case, we are charging them for the draw because we are ahead and they likely have to call our shove on the turn mathematically.
Thanks. I don't see how I can fold to a min raise on the turn. It's either call, raise or shove. Don't have enough chips to raise so call or shove are my only options.
This is one of those situations where both players hit the flop pretty hard, then improved on the turn. That's what creates big pots. Unfortunately, didn't go my way.
I can see now that a call on the turn might have been all right. Normally, I'm against committing half my stack but it's early in the tourney and I would still have over 25 bigs.
I could sniff that something was up. Could have limited my losses and prayed for a heart.
Just goes to show that there are no absolute rules in poker. Always be ready for the exception.
Yes, I didn't expand on the hand itself, but basically what I'm saying is that call is lile the only option once you bet and villain raised on the turn.
I do not necessarily imply that you should fold on the river in case villain continues. If we only call on the turn we still have villain's bluffs in his range. Nevertheless, this decision os read-dependent and villain-dependent. Against many medium-stakes mtt players your top pair average kicker is beaten 90% of the time if villain calls flop, raises tu. And continues betting on the river. Not true for all villains though, so...
Good points. Most weekend hacks (like myself) aren't bold enough to barrel with air, especially so early when they've already doubled their starting stack.
He's got to have something. Maybe checking the turn is a way to control pot size. What do you think?
Well, barreling this turn vs checking is a close call in my opinion. I tend to barrel-bluff quite a lot so I need to barrel my value hands a lot as well for balance, but balance may be irrelevant here...
I like getting value from queens here (not many draws out there) but it's not like you're going to get 3 streets of value very often here (well, some villains are sticky) so a check is totally reasonable. But for this particular question, I would be more observant of what the best posters around here are saying.
I think this is a nice combo for checking the turn. Can you give us the stacksizes? Pre and flop are fine, could size smaller too. Calling turn as played.
He's never actually considering folding, he's just trying to save face during the times you do have a set. When you do have a set, he will say he almost folded.
Haha. Yes, some hollywooding was probably involved.
Here's my conclusion. The hand played pretty standard until he minraised on the turn. Then, there are only two options, call or shove. (Can't fold such a strong hand to a minraise; not enough chips to reraise).
I rejected calling because I would have committed half my chips and all the tournament poker books say not to do this. However, this might be a rare exception.
He's probably ahead. He would have bet more if he's bluffing me off the pot. The minraise is a sweetener. If I call and miss the draw, I'm still near my starting stack fairly early in the tourney. If the heart hits, I'm the table captain.
This is why poker is such a great game. Even the most common rules have to be broken from time to time. Knowing when to do it separates the men from the boys.
