Plugged it in we approx 16% equity. Clear fold on flop assuming villian is committing with this flop overbet which he should be.

Sent from my LGLS740 using 2+2 Forums

The reverse is so obviously true. You have to be good to limp. This hand history proves that clearly enough.

Pretty much the worse thing beginners to can do to learn poker is to limp and pray for coolers.

This is faulty logic. Each decision is independent of one another. You do not have to call simply because you improved your hand after calling on previous streets.

If we fold after hitting our 9 the logic is even faultier though. That would mean we called flop thinking we're dead to a turn shove, which is a very likely occurrence given the committing flop bet. Are we floating and trying to steal on a diamond turn, aka trying to hit a 9 outer? Are we going for a BDFD with terrible odds and stack sizes? Do we actually think we have the best hand against his overbet lead range?

That said, I think calling the flop is horrendous. Folding the turn after improving is pretty dang bad, but not as bad as calling the flop is.

When evaluating the turn, it doesn't matter why we called the flop. The flop call could have been fine or could have been horrible. That is irrelevant to our decision on the turn. Very similar situation to when we call a flop because we think we have the best hand and a blank turn comes...so we can't possibly fold a turn barrel right? WRONG!

BTW, I wasn't arguing what our decision on the turn should be. I'm simply pointing out the faulty logic that the poster used to arrive at his conclusion.

if you're going to limp w/ A9, you're saying "i hope i get aces up at best, an ace at worst"; flopping the nut flush doesn't happen often enough to talk about. so now you've hit your best case scenario, and you're going to fold to a board where what beats you? AA, AJ, JJ, 44? where everyone limped pre-flop? when he's already stated that "at this table every Ax and even flush draws show up here more often"? you have to call here, you have him crushed.

I think if we call the flop in the first place it would be with the intention of getting it in, with the stack/pot sizes. Why fold if you improve?

Sent from my LGLS740 using 2+2 Forums

Sorry i misread that thought u said not folding the turn after improving was bad

Sent from my LGLS740 using 2+2 Forums

Ok, so now you are evaluating against a range of hands which is much better logic than simply questioning "what are you doing limping w/ A9 if you won't call a shove w/ aces up on a pretty dry board?" I'll limp A9 sooted because it's profitable. That shouldn't prevent me from folding hands when I need to. Sometimes you should fold two pairs. Sometimes you should fold boats. Sometimes you should call with Ace high.

@GPAD : I understand. I should have mentioned the rest of my thought process. It's all about ranging your opponent after his flop bet & turn bet. Here, in this specific hand, I don't think his range changes from flop to turn all that much. He is extremely polarized to having a made hand that he wants to "protect" from draws, aka top pair or two pair, sometimes a set. We improved against a lot of that by turning a 9, and those hands are still going to be "protecting" themselves by shoving this blank turn. The big draws he bet out on the flop trying to get all in (as if LLSNL nits do that >_>) might give up on this turn.

I agree that separate street decisions are generally independent and require further evaluation of increased information. I just think this hand is us seeing a CONFIRMATION of the information we should have realized from the flop overbet. We were LDO beat on the flop. We have caught up to his range with the turn 9, so we should call the turn.

No, opening does NOT leave us in the same position. Consider all the times when we get it heads up with AQ and the flop comes K97 and we make a better hand fold with a cbet. Huge victory.

Or consider this hand. If we raise it big preflop, he might just fold ATo preflop. That's pretty standard for many players, actually. And when this flop comes out, he has to be afraid that AT is no good anyway. We have the option to barrel him off a better hand. We also have the option to check back the flop when we hit an ace to realize our SDV. Perhaps checking it back allows us to get another bet or two from a worse pair.

My standard line against a villain who has a fold button is to barrel if there are draws, and to check back my pair if the board is dry.

Having initiative in position puts us in total control of the hand. This is so important that it's just about impossible to explain, but if you just try raising your button more I think you'll get a feel for it. When I first started doing it, it worked so well that I went too far and started raising K8o. I was addicted!

Anyway, I don't recommend raising K8o. When I'm against limpers on the button (and on the co if the button is tight), I'm raising 22+, 67s+, T8s+, A2s+, KJo+, JTo, and all suited broadways. As you can see, A9s is right in the middle of that range. Maybe it's exploitable but so far it's worked pretty great. I'll limp some of those hands (low pp, suited broadways) from earlier positions to hit gin, but abusing the button is just incredibly powerful.

This hand would have played totally differently, and ime much more profitably, if we had raised preflop.

you should not fold two pairs on this board, on this table, when you already called w/ top pair and the only thing that's changed is you've made your second pair.

and limping w/ A9 sooted is not profitable for you if you're willing to fold in this situation. you've made your hand on a board w/ nothing scary. this is where you take your profit, not fold.

The choice to raise preflop comes down to just one question : Can I isolate or take it down pre frequently enough? If it's uncertain (table has been limpcally versus big raises or we don't have reliable data either way yet) I'm fine with deferring trying to iso until we have a little more hand, or just a hand that doesn't do as well in a family pot like AJo/KJo.

You really don't get what he's saying. He's just saying that the turn decision and flop decisions should be IRRELEVANT from eachother. On the flop, you take what information you have, put your opponent on a range, estimate your equity vs that range, and make a decision based on that. On the turn, you do the same. There are situations (not this one, mind you) where you can improve your hand, but the new action (and thus new information) says your opponent's new range is now better than your hand, and thus you don't have equity to continue. An extreme example of this would be raising a couple limpers in the CO with AA, the BB and 2 of them call. Then the flop comes JT9 two tone, and BB bets, one limper calls, and the other limper raises. You had your opponents CRUSHED preflop, but that's irrelevant now. The action, board, and information gleaned from it all tells you your hand's equity sucks, and you should get out.

This hand is different, because I see Villain's range as fairly static from flop to turn. He's got a made hand and is "charging" draws. That made hand can be top pair, two pair, or a set. We go ahead of all his top pair & 1 of his two pair combinations on the turn, leaving only AJ or a set ahead of us. Combinatorics probably make this a call, unless we can only put villain on a flopped 2pr/set.

Grunch: raise pre

+1000

Sent from my BNTV400 using 2+2 Forums

Limping A9s is great for 1/2...trips out kicked and flush over flush is where we will make out money...

But wtf are you doing on the flop? Calling for sh.its and giggles?
Just fold flop, now that you've f*cked up, call the jam

snap call and expect to see AK here like 90% of the time.

the overbet and telling you he has something good are two big signs of weakness, 1 pr hands.

uhm, you don't understand. i said "as played, you have to call" and then he came in w/ "every decision is separate". yeah sure, but AS PLAYED, in THIS HAND, you have to call. then you told me i don't understand and laid out some absurd scenario to prove your point, then said that this hand is different, as if this isn't the specific hand i'm talking about.

:grunch:

Thread looks long, hopefully there's an interesting discussion to read next.

What kind of raise size would you need at this table to get 2-3 handed? This is a spot where I'd like to raise to $15-20 and either take down the dead money or get HU against a hand that likely doesn't have an A (I'm ahead). The weird wide limping range that V's seem to have make this less attractive though.

Limping isn't *awful* if we can get some value the times when we don't flush out. I probably also limp here.

Fold flop. He's got a big hand he didn't want to raise in EP, now he's scared of being out drawn. But you're still behind.

OTT ... I think I snap him off and beat his AK type hands. The speech makes me think we're good too.

We're going to lose pretty often after the shove, but we're good often enough to call him.

Limp or raise pre, I prefer raising but so long as you're not folding you're not making a mistake.

snap fold flop, it's an old nit betting into 20 other people. Probably pocket jokers.

snap call turn, get really annoyed at yourself for calling flop when he shows AJ or 44, or, tell him you knew you were beat but you just knew that the 9 was coming on the turn when he shows A4 or AK. Either way, most difficult decision will be what to order from the cocktail waitress. If you lost I think a double makers neat is the right line as it may make the rest of the table think you're tilting. If you won, order a nuts & berries since everyone is going to want to stack the lucky sob with the girly drink in his hand, also nuts & berries is god damn delicious I don't care if it isn't macho.

Grunch,
Fold flop. He's a nit playing to protect his hand. And since he can't have an A and a FD this is a fold.
As played, fold turn. I didn't run the equities with over played AK type hands because most nits slow down OTT with said hands.