I check this turn pretty much alwAys.

What I need to think about is: Does this villain bluff more than he traps? And, in his bluffs, have I seen him c/r bluff?

Now, I can't(shouldn't) think of how he plays his hands against others, because, he's not a straightforward player as I said earlier; I need to understand and realize how he plays against me; meaning, he's likely to play this spot completely straight up and lead the turn vs. say, a very tight, timid player perhaps, because he knows he's going to lose value if he checks; whereas if it's vs. someone like myself, who always finds the value here HU with AA(and a lot of whiffs, too), then the correct play for him should be to check.

Then I have to think about how he plays these rivers when both of us go check/check on the turn. If he is likely to give up and never bet as a bluff and/or, if he isn't that likely to "keep me honest" w/smaller pairs, a bad King perhaps etc. when I bet, then for me to elect to check back on the turn has lost most, if not all, of its appeal/value.


This villain enjoyed "trapping" in spots like this and esp. against players like myself(who always know where the 'value' button is). So, to counteract that trait of his, I need to figure out what he does more of in spots like this: Does he trap more or does he bluff more on the river?(I've already established that he doesn't c/r bluff).

At first, I thought this was a routine trivial spot because villain never checkraise/bluffs, and, he's also not as likely to bet the river w/bluffs and/or small pairs etc. even if it goes check/check OTT. The only times he really tries to bluff at pots is when he was the preflop raisor or if he raised somewhere during the post flop round, say, with a big, double nut draw or something. But, because he does like to trap, and because there are few hands that really hurt me by checking, I think it's best to check back on the turn to avoid being trapped, and then just call a bet if he bets or make the value bet if he checks. Now, If I thought that villain would never pay me off lightly, then I wouldn't be missing that bet on the turn. But because he will pay me off light, and because he does love to trap, I think I can balance that out pretty good by betting the flop, checking the turn, and either call or bet the river. Sound right?

Yes

Heads up vs. a tricky opponent.


I'm never folding AA here.

Did not read the responses yet...

In vacuum I always bet turn and call this hand down, because with AA I am too high in my range to fold.

I like a turn check

Nice to have a hand you can call river with after betting the flop and checking the turn.

And the it closes down the "value owned" shop

But if the J put a flush draw out there I'd be much more apt to bet

I agree.

I think what Villain should do on the turn depends on the cards he holds, the cards he thinks you hold, and how he thinks you'll respond to his action.

As a trite example,
• If he has a bust, thinks you'll check behind if he checks, and thinks you'll tenaciously call it down if he bets, then he should check.
• If he has a bust, thinks you'll check behind if he checks, but thinks you'll fold if he bets, then he should bet.
• If he has a bust, thinks you'll bet if he checks, and thinks you'll call if he check/raises, then he should check, intending to fold to a bet.
• If he has a bust, thinks you'll bet if he checks, and thinks you'll fold if he check/raises, then he should check, intending to raise if you bet.

If he's a good or decent player, then how he plays his bust will depend on how he expects you to behave, based on your past behavior.

• If he has a better hand than your two pairs, aces over jacks, then he might bet directly or he might check, intending to raise if you bet.

He's unlikely to have a hand better than your two pairs (aces and jacks). I figured about 20% for random cards, but of course he doesn't have random cards so that you're probably not as much as a 4 to 1 favorite. Still, since he's unlikely to have three of a kind or better after this turn, you're probably still a substantial favorite.

But even though the board paired on the turn, he may have a draw to a better hand than your two pairs, aces over jacks.

Is it worth risking a check/raise to knock him off a draw? Does he pay off with less than your two pairs, aces over jacks?

If we check behind on the turn, will he be induced to bluff the river?

If we're destined to have the best hand at showdown, we can't lose this pot unless we fold. If we check behind on the turn, the most it can cost us to see the showdown is one big bet. If we bet the turn, and if we get check/raised, it will cost us three big bets to see the showdown.

The risk to giving a free card is Villain may have K*** and catch another king on the river... or Villain may have AQ** and catch a ten on the river.

After much careful thought, I think your proper play is to check behind on the third betting round. By playing this way, you limit your risk to one big bet.

After mixgameADDict's suggestion that $40/$80 O8 is a completely different game than $4/$8, there's still a question in my mind, about whether or not my opinion is worth anything as regards a $40/$80 O8 game.

Anyhow, for what it's worth, those are some of my thoughts about the play of this hand.

Buzz

Checking the turn intuitively seems wrong for two reasons:

we are missing tremendous value from calldowns from worse hands;

if we only continue with J+ for value, we cannot add any significant portion of bluffs, and I would like to barrel with some hopeless hands.

Having read everything Rush17 written about his opponent, I think bet-folding AA here is just fine. Cannot be stressed enough that explotative plays are higher EV against unbalanced opponents whose strategy we know well.

I think there's valid reason for both betting the turn and checking the turn. I will have to think about it some more. Thanks for the great food for thought, everyone.

Buzz, if you don't think your opinion matters just because the limit may be higher than what you're used to playing, then you're an exception to that rule because your opinion and advice has always been right up there with anyone else's. Don't be silly. No one knows everything regardless of what they play, I sure as hell don't!

I think it is split down the middle for good reason. Pros and cons of both. So I would just take the course of action that would prevent me from making a huge mistake. And that would be bet/folding with the best hand.

checking the turn against an opponent who 'defends every blind' is much less attractive than against more balanced opponents

that is the same reason why many posters advocated bet/calling over bet/folding..


it is only when OP added additional reads about villain's check-raise range that bet-folding became a viable option at all, without that additional information it would be borderline preposterous

I'm always trying to find the balance, although sometimes you just have to go with your gut.

Going by most of these responses(and just to reiterate on the responses above^), if I check behind on the turn, I do stand to lose tremendous value if villain c/c's both streets w/a King(I'm giving him a King in this example because I feel it's a reasonable holding that he might have, and to which he might get attached to, especially knowing my tendency to barrel on a bunch of streets).


Re: bet/folding the turn vs. checking: I think villain is more likely to c/r the turn w/a better hand than he is to bet the river as a bluff(or w/a King etc.), so I thought that the better play in this spot vs. this villain, is to check the turn and take it from there(meaning) if I checked the turn and he lead the river, I would just call, but if he just checked both the turn/river, I would bet both streets. But, Buzz points out that, I'm slightly less than a 4 to 1 favorite, so, even though he might be more likely to c/r when he has a better hand, the likelihood of him actually having that hand are not enough, where, it would make checking back OTT the more optimal play. And actually, he does get tied to hands, so the value goes way up with two Aces in this spot.

So, all in all, I should be betting the turn with the intention to fold to a raise and not worry about being exploited because my reads are very strong against this player.

You appear to have detailed reads on this villain. Do you have history with him in this game? In other games? What were the dynamics of this game when the hand came up? Were either of you steaming? Running over the table? Was he sitting near you or across the table? ( sounds silly but this could be important in determining how brave someone gets.) Was there bad blood between you that may have caused him to go out of his way to outplay you? (This could mean a higher chance of a bluff.) Any other things that might be relevant that aren't directly related to O8?

Absolutely, the history is there thus the reads.

Neither of us were steaming(it was still too early for that. )

No one was running over the table, although he was doing better than me at the time.

No bad blood.

We were seated fairly close to one another, so, less likely for him to be bluffing, would you agree?