What position does PF need to be to call Turn? - Medium Stakes Poker Forum

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy Other Poker Games Mid-High Stakes Limit

What position does PF need to be to call Turn?

Post Reply Subscribe

...

07-11-2017 , 11:41 AM

NedSchneebly

journeyman

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 310

Villain opens, Hero defends ATo.

Flop KQ7r. xbc.

Turn 4. xb...

My question is, what position does the standard LAG Villain need to open preflop from in order to justify a Turn call.

Quote

07-11-2017 , 12:53 PM

jdr0317

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 8,231

Quote:

Originally Posted by NedSchneebly

Villain opens, Hero defends ATo.

Flop KQ7r. xbc.

Turn 4. xb...

My question is, what position does the standard LAG Villain need to open preflop from in order to justify a Turn call.

Whatever position allows them to have T9s/86s minimum IMO. So probably calling twice v HJ and folding v LJ.

*no range math done here, so take my handwaving for what it's worth.

Quote

07-11-2017 , 02:14 PM

Munga30

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 2,699

I had drafted up a little more than jdr but lost it. Same conclusion. My LJ open range just doesn't have enough worse aces (that we block) and sc's below the Q. Plenty of pairs 33+ but seems you need a fair number of those to overcome our RIOs. My HJ range may suffer that too but I'm prolly a little thin on sc's compared to some of you.

And, God help me for asking, but does a "standard lag" have a flop k range here?

Quote

07-12-2017 , 02:45 AM

NedSchneebly

journeyman

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 310

I would say a standard lag would generally not have a check range here on this type of a board. I also like the call vs BTN-HJ, fold vs LJ-UTG range as well. Out of curiosity, how would you actually explain using range math what the best play would be here. Thanks!

Quote

07-12-2017 , 05:33 AM

monikrazy

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 28,046

I disagree that lags don't have a checkback range on this flop, especially if they opened from late position. Even more so if sb called and started with a range advantage.

Last edited by monikrazy; 07-12-2017 at 05:39 AM.

Quote

07-12-2017 , 09:36 AM

jdr0317

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 8,231

Quote:

Originally Posted by NedSchneebly

I think a LAG will have a pretty clear check behind range consisting of pocket pairs JJ and lower that aren't a set and their Ace highs. I believe a LAG will bet everything above JJ and then a good chunk of everything below A hi (since a lot of that will be straight draws). Obviously the more of the latter we have, the more we want to call.

This is a quick guess at the situation against a BTN -3:

Code:

PokerCruncher-Advanced-iPhone V.8.2.1

(Equity,  Win,  Tie)
Player 1:  80.0%  80.0%  0%  {QQ+, 77, 44, AQs+, K9s+, QTs+, J9s+, T9s, AQo+, KTo+, QJo}
Player 2:  20.0%  20.0%  0%  {ATo}

Board:  [Kh Qd 4s 7c ?]
Deal To:  River
Dead Cards:  {}

Monte Carlo Simulation: 450000 trials

And BTN -2:

Code:

PokerCruncher-Advanced-iPhone V.8.2.1

(Equity,  Win,  Tie)
Player 1:  74.2%  74.2%  0%  {QQ+, 77, 44, AQs+, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 86s, AQo+, K9o+, QTo+, JTo}
Player 2:  25.8%  25.8%  0%  {ATo}

Board:  [Kh Qd 4s 7c ?]
Deal To:  River
Dead Cards:  {}

Monte Carlo Simulation: 450000 trials

Obviously both situations, we have slightly better than needed immediate odds to call (4.25:1), but given it's a bit of an RIO hand, and assuming a high rate of straight draw bluffing, I'd feel good about folding the former and probably call the latter.

Quote

07-12-2017 , 11:43 AM

NedSchneebly

journeyman

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 310

Thank you JDR, was not aware of this app. Very cool and easy to use.

Quote

07-12-2017 , 12:12 PM

NedSchneebly

journeyman

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 310

Thank you JDR, was not aware of this app. Very cool and easy to use.

When I include his entire range of HJ openings I find that ATo is roughly 35-65 vs Villain. Does your input range only include hands that you think he would bet turn with?

Quote

07-12-2017 , 12:44 PM

jdr0317

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 8,231

Quote:

Originally Posted by NedSchneebly

Yes. Like I don't think he's going to bet the turn w/ A8 (I took that out of his range because I think he's more likely to check and try to show down or hit an Ace). Against chronic double barrelers, we can start figuring out ways to take advantage of that (like how we could profitably continue w/ this hand as likely a call or a raise).

Quote

07-12-2017 , 09:07 PM

#10

leavesofliberty

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 6,296

ProPokerTools for home.

Quote

07-13-2017 , 04:04 PM

#11

JLot

journeyman

Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 259

If we take the Button -3 scenario from JDR's analysis to be a situation where we should not call, would this be a candidate for a turn bluff raise (top of our folding range)? If not, which hands do folks like for a turn bluff raise here after our opponent bets and why?

Quote

07-13-2017 , 04:44 PM

#12

6MaxLHE

veteran

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 2,007

JTs or ATs suited that turns a flush draw would be a good spot to x/r turn as a semibluff. The problem with adding in pure bluffs is that we really shouldn't have any in our range.

Are we really going to x/float the flop and x/r the turn with 98s when villian's range often connects with this board texture? Seems rather spewy and would only do it against thinking superlags whose turn aggression is exploitable.

Quote

07-13-2017 , 06:56 PM

#13

jdr0317

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 8,231

Quote:

Originally Posted by JLot

I'd probably stick to semibluffs on this texture, since value ranges are strong and I don't expect many players to be value betting twice with a hand they plan on folding to an aggressive opponent. So JT for sure. Maybe some of the low gutters that turned a FD. If AT turned a FD, I'd want to call with it actually.

This being said, I don't think check raising AT is a bad play, and a good adjustment to people who will bet the turn here w/ like 99 (not exactly a few and far between player type).

Quote

Post Reply Subscribe

...