Not knowing what to do when the K hits (or J or almost any other card) is why I like raising / getting it in on the flop if you think you are best.

As played, leading is probably best, but it's so unlikely you are getting more from him if he doesn't have a K or a boat. If you check, he might lead without a K or a boat to rep one, and I'm sure he will bet if he has one.

More interesting to me is what was your plan if a blank hit the turn? Would you lead? Call a raise? Check/call?

Bart Hanson's "Aggressive Action" theorem suggests that when villain raises post-flop, he is never folding the hand. I lead $150, shove river.

he mentioned that theorem in 2010 i believe, things can change

I would've been looking to check raise the turn. I was willing to get it in on the flop but scared that me putting in the 4th raise would tell him in bright neon lights that I had kings up or a set, and allow him to get away from anything I was beating.

After I just call and a brick comes on the turn it's a different story. There was a good chance he'd bet enough to commit himself against my push.

btw I think some people in this thread are failing to see my flop play from his perspective.

There are people in this thread suggesting I fold my top two pair on the flop to his 3-bet. If I 4-bet the flop I'm showing even MORE strength than he's shown in this hand. There aren't many -- if any -- hands that a tight player that reads me as tight are going to call with that I'm beating.

Especially against a shove for 5x his flop reraise.

There is zero reason to 4b the flop. Literally only get called by better and you fold all his bluffs and draws most of the time.

Leading turn looks more like a bare king. If he bluff-3b your c/r on the flop (not a chance from a 'tight' player) he's not going to bluff another K after you call the flop.

This is a situation where he either has something, and you're getting paid off, or he doesn't and you're not getting any more money anyways.

The hand plays itself from here if you lead the turn.

Grunch,

There are quite a few things missing from your read that might allow this hand to play differently but as described. Flat flop, lead turn for 150-165 and shove river. NH.

Reason: There are only 2 logical combos of sets (22), 4 additional combos of KJ and the vast majority are TPGK.

You mentioned how you figured him for a tight reg when you assumed he knew you as tight but that seems a bit off with a very small sample together. Or, any knowledge of how he chipped-up, etc. Given those few things, amoung others, that are missing and the fact that fish can chip-up, too, lead me to stack off. Independent of ultimate result of that play.

Pretty much exactly what I said lol

I guess my problem with just calling the flop is that if you are ahead, and you think you are, you aren't getting any more from him unless he catches up somehow anyway. Maybe he calls a re-raise w/ a straight draw or KQ-type hand, although I doubt it. Your check/raise from the bb looks so strong, though, especially when you then flat him.

Let's hope he had a K (or you were behind on the flop).

Raising pre is burning $, you'd need to raise so much that it's pretty much a steal and you're looking for all folds.

Good to not 4bet the flop. Nothing worse is ever calling, if you think you're ahead flat the 3bet and see the turn.

I wouldn't take JJ out of V's range though. I don't think I've ever limped with KK or AA, every once in a while I will with QQ or JJ, actually a couple of the biggest pots I've ever won because it really keeps in certain guys' bluffing hands.

OTT, definitely lead, it's not close. Hands of V that aren't improved by the K aren't putting any more $ in because a bare K is the least he's putting you on. 22, JJ aren't folding he'll put you on just trip Ks not a boat, so we need to bet ott.

But yeah, better question is what would have been the plan/sizing on blank turns, and what constitutes a blank turn? Is a T a blank turn, or even a 9 or Q?, what would you have done on those turns. You should have a plan in place.

Okay. At least I wouldn't be the only one to take this line. Good discussion all.

I lead for $100 on the turn, and he folded his J2 face up, cursing his luck for the K counterfeiting him on the turn.

I lead the turn mainly because I read him as having two pair or better on the flop, and every one of those hands besides J2 turned lower boat than me. And even if he was playing a lone K all crazy like, he'd love that turn too.

However, in retrospect, I really think I played the turn wrong. Not just because of what he had, but because of the reasoning I gave for my flop play. When I just called on the flop I'm hoping he puts me on either a K or QT.

Leading out on the turn sure as hell doesn't look like QT. Even a crying flop call with a king probably doesn't lead the turn.

Plus, if he does have a hand that will pay me off, he'll almost certainly bet it himself when I check to him. Clearly no boat checks behind. That money would've been going in anyway.

So checking the turn disguises my hand more, and just in case I've read him wrong and he's running some crazy bluff (or decides to turn his counterfeited two pair into a bluff) I can give him a chance to take another stab.

Plus, hell, even if he checks the turn behind maybe he makes a hero call on the river with his J2, or whatever else he could have if it wasn't a complete bluff.

Thanks for the discussion everyone. It really helped to solidify my thoughts on this hand.

I started this thread unsure if I should've put another raise in on the flop or not, but the more I've looked at it the more clear it is that he probably would've just dumped the hand with anything I was beating. Just calling on the flop was the right play, but a bad turn and a bad lead killed the action. Such is the life of a poker player.

I did have a plan in place. I was putting him on 2 pair or a set on the flop, and worried that 4-betting the flop would just get action from the hands that were beating me. Check raising the turn would get action from the hands I was beating too.

Anything but a 2, A, or 9 would've been a safe card as far as I was concerned. And I still would've check raised a 9 cause I really wasn't putting him on QT.

Why would you want to c/r if he only has sets or 2 pair? Before this hand, your V description is tight reg, so you couldn't have had J2 or K2 in his range, so you're only up against hands that you tie with or are dominated by, and you want to c/r?

And a 2 would be a pretty awesome card ott. It lowers how likely it is for V to have 22, so all you would be losing to realistically would be JJ.

I said earlier that I actually did think that limping along w K2s or J2s on the button was in his range. There's tons of limping in these games even from the tighter players, but these players usually don't 3-bet on the flop unless they have the goods.

If you're putting a guy on 2 pair or a set on the flop, a 2 on the turn is obviously the worst card in the deck. Every single one of those hands would now be beating me.

What on earth are you putting him on to want to call down after a 2 turn?

Knowing he would limp K2 or J2 changes everything. I don't put this in a tight reg's pre-flop range. Next time, just give description and that you'd played with him for 5 minutes. Having the "tight reg" image (at least in my mind) skewed my thinking.

Being results oriented, raising flop was your best option, which is inline with what I wrote above. I would have put K2 or J2 in that post, but as I stated, I don't see a tight reg limping those, regardless of how a game is playing.

Looks like your read was way off here. If your read had been right then I still think it's a fold OTF. As played the turn is not very interesting but I would guess checking is marginally better because of the (very unlikely) possibility he was going nuts with Q-T and will now fold to a bet.

Sent from my SGH-T959V using 2+2 Forums

Yeah lol, then don't describe him as tight. I don't know what goes on in your room, but it doesn't really matter, if a guy limps J2/K2 then he's loose passive.


It doesn't change the hands he can have, just the probabilities of the hands he can have. Let's say KJ, K2, J2, JJ, 22 are in his range. If a 3 hit ott, there would be, respectively, the following combos possible for those hands: 4, 6, 6, 1, 3. If a second 2 hit ott, then the combos possible are: 4, 4, 4, 1, 1. That's the difference. With a brick hitting ott we beat/tie 80% of V's possible hands, with a 2 hitting ott, we beat/tie 85.7% of V's possible hands.

WTF? Not being a dick, but I've been confused by your read the entire thread. And now you say that you learned afterward that he was more taggy than laggy...you do realize a taggy player DOES NOT limp the BTN with J2, right?

Can we talk a little more about leading the flop?

I would definitely lead against a calling station, and definitely c/c against a maniac. But the player in this hand is somewhat in between.

I worry that if I lead, I fold out JT, which might bet if checked to. I'm basically playing my hand face up...

Likewise something like K6s, although I guess that might call sometimes.

Otoh KT might raise if he thinks you're "betting for information," which would be cool. In fact a lot of Kx hands probably think about raising here, no?

When we talk about leading here, is it mainly cuz a lot of 1/2 players are calling stations, or because its more likely to make money against a reasonably sane villain?

Back when I used to play a lot of limit, check-raising the flop was a pretty common, standard play in a lot of situations. I took this habit with me to no-limit, but the more I think about it, the more I wonder when, if ever, it's useful in no-limit. Maybe as a squeeze? maybe to get certain stack sizes all-in?

i take it, most of you don't c/r the flop very much. Do you do it at all? When?

C/r absolutely HAS to be in your arsenal as a limit player for a couple of very key reasons. It can sometimes be the only way to protect your hand in a situation when leading can't (and note, I am not saying it folds out draws, just makes them pay too much). It can also be a good way on later streets to make you that all important extra BB, since pot size can dictate a call by weaker hands.

Neither of these situations really exist in NL. I mean, sure, sometimes on a really wet flop, if you know your Vs really well, and especially know that the guy to your left is likely to bet, and you know that if you bet, you will start a train of calls, you could conceivably c/r as a way to blow most of the draws out and get HU with only a single draw to worry about, but that situation doesn't come up as often. As for the second reason, in NL bets are usually multiples of the BB, making earning a single BB less important than in limit (and BBs in NL tend to be lower anyway for the equivalent level).

That being said, there are certainly reasons to c/r in NL, but mostly they involve situations where you are either bluffing, semibluffing, or trying to get your stack in the middle and can't do it by straight betting (straight betting would mean you are overbetting the pot by too much, also note that this strategy would be targeting later streets, hopefully post commitment threshold).

In the situation we have in this hand, I really feel that OP had gone on autopilot, and was just clicking buttons without much thought as to why, and then went back over the hand afterwards to come up with some thin justifications for his play. This hand postflop should have been planned as a bet/bet/bet line since that would have given OP the most flexibility and the most likelihood of getting a significant portion of his stack in the middle.

As played, the c/r OTF by OP is simply targeting too small a range (if any at all) of a "tight, careful, middle-aged regular whom the dealers call Action Dan", and then when OP actually gets action, he comes up with some thinly veiled excuse as to why he should not shove, or at least reraise, or fold.

If this guy cannot be reraising a draw, then it's doubtful that he is reraising a stone bluff, so the argument that a shove folds out his bluffs is weak. It then becomes pretty simple, if this guy can have K2 or J2 in his range you reraise (maybe a shove is too much, I dunno, just in my experience once the guy comes over your c/r, he is unlikely to fold), if he cannot have these hands in his range, you fold. Flatting is absolutely the worst thing you can do, since any A, 9, K, Q, J, T, 2 (23 cards as far as we know!) could either kill the action, or your hand.

I think this hand is a mess, quite frankly, and I think OP probably made the wrong decision on every street (one could certainly argue for a raise preflop), and got very lucky. This whole hand is way too results oriented for me.

Fold flop. A tight competent regular isn't coming back over the top with J2 and is only sometimes coming back over the top with K2 and he's only playing those hands if they're suited. That leaves 22, which we're in really bad shape against, and KJ, which we're chopping with.

As played, I like a lead/shove because of the stack sizes.

Lol @ finding out our read was a 5 minute sample size and he name was "Action Dan". That probably changes it from a fold to a small 4-bet.

Hate the check/raise (look at the spot it puts us in, guessing game between sets and worse two pair... and even when we're ahead, I think we lose value with the c/r line). Check/call obv suboptimal as well. Only reasonable conclusion is to lead flop imo.