So one tactic I like to employ when raising AQ or AK UTG if I only get one caller and spike top pair on an innocuous flop is to play it a bit more passive and let the V do the work for me. In the few times I have employed the move it has gotten me 2 and sometimes 3 bets I may not have gotten otherwise. Let me know what you think or how to maximize the value out of it. Lately, when I think I am best on the river I bet around 1/3 of the pot if I am looking for a call and they usually call. How much higher can I go and still get calls?

Effective stacks $300. I've been at table with Villain for an hour and he has been passive to this point. Wasn't worried about letting a card peel vs. him.

Hero dealt AQ

Hero is UTG and opens to $12
Button (V) calls $12
SB folds
BB folds

Pot: $25

Flop: 2 A 6

Hero checks
Button checks

Pot: $25

Turn: 8

Hero checks
Button bets $25
Hero raises to $50
Button calls $50

Pot: $125

River: 7

Hero bets $40
Button calls $40

This hand is just played awfully. The standard line of bet bet bet works quite well vs fish. I may take a check flop line vs a winning player to get value on turn and river but I am NEVER checking the flop and the turn. That is just horrible especially against a passive villain. Also, check-raising is just FPS and you are overrepping your hand by doing it (looks more like AA than AQ). Also, you put $50 in on the turn. Why are you betting $40 on the river? You should take that play right out of your playbook. Your bets should increase on each street. Villains have difficulty folding on the river when they have put a decent amount of money in on previous streets so I'm betting much bigger.

Really dislike checking TP2K twice HU OOP, there are plenty of hands V'll call a flop or turn bet with that V will also check back twice.

Also the $40 bet is far too small, if he's calling $40 he's calling $80.

Checking the dry flop isn't too bad (though I usually bet here, because if I'm cbetting air I want to cbet a made hand), but checking the turn isn't good.

Also why the minraise on the turn? Again, if he's calling a minraise with a hand you beat he's calling a raise to $70.

Except when he doesn't have an Ace and folds to my c-bet of $15 and I only win $12 off of him -$2 for the rake and $1 for a tip for a net result of $9? That's ****ty value for AQs heads up.

Because I am putting V on a weak pair and want him to call. Hence why I am posting the hand here asking how much more I can raise the turn and bet on the river for max value without folding out worse. You call it FPS I call it extracting another bet out of him when I pick up a read that he is trying to steal the pot now by overbetting it.

My initial thought was to raise the turn to $75 but I didn't want to scare him away. Same thing on the river. C/R 3x his bet on the turn after checking the flop and turn and then leading for 2/3 on the river seems way too strong a line to take vs. a player with what I believe to be a middle pair.

I didn't say he was a moronic fish, just passive. He hasn't gotten out of line and hasn't showed down complete garbage.

If villain is willing to call a min c/r after potting the turn, he likely has a hand he's willing to call 3 streets with.

We're trying to target midpairs with a c/r...? Makes no sense. Those hands would be more willing to call a regular bet.

I understand the thought, but honestly if he's calling a c-minraise then he's calling a bigger cr most of the time.

If he's passive then what are you expecting him to bet with that you beat?

99, TT, 89, T8

You should make your decisions based on V's tendencies, not on what your hand is. For example, if V is a station that will peel 2 streets with an underpair or will never fold Ax and won't bluff or bet thinly when checked to you should be betting. If V is spewy and has shown down a couple bluffs then check or bet small to induce a raise. If V is nitty and won't call 3 barrels with AJ/AT type hands then we should check at some point to avoid value owning ourselves.

OK, I guess those make sense after a flop is checked through. What about on flop?

Also, you think he's calling a check raise with those hands?

I don't think your logic is consistent throughout the hand here, if you are going to check the flop which I don't hate against a lot of villains, I think leading the turn is mandatory.

As played check-call the turn imo, he will probably fold everything you beat aside from probably Ax-AJ and most of those he likely bets the flop with, I think. He also definitely calls a flop bet with them if you were to lead, soooooooooo.

As played after he calls the c-minr he has something he can call the river with, I'd bet larger on the river.

Yes, so either win a small pot from a pocket pair or win a big pot from Ax. I prefer winning big pots. Yes, sometimes villain has a pocket but sometimes he has an Ace and we get the big $s when he has an ace. If every time you flop an Ace heads up you check two streets you are losing a ton of value.

You should never be check raising the turn so it's a moot point.


You are just looking for excuses to lose value.

BTW a check raise on the turn allows your villain to play perfectly. If he isn't a moron he should only be continuing with hands that beat you and folding hands that don't.

grunch

I'm c-betting this board with 100% of my range OOP if my image is good. OOP, i'm checking this turn (sometimes). (sometimes) Against villains that are actually decent, i'll bet/check/bet here. (sometimes) Something along the lines of 3/4 to 1.5x pot on the river if the turn got checked through (player dependent).

I don't really have a standard line for this, but I like that one (as long as theres not too much history between me and V. (The more intelligent V's have started to realize that I almost never take this line as a bluff and rarely do it with a monster, so it kind of caps me and sets me up to get bluffraised on the river. In the words of gobbledygook... Si'mexploitablebutdon'tgivea****mostlybecauseigetp aidbyfishS). People love to pay me off with a mid pair in this situation for 2 streets instead of just 1.

Yeah, bet/check/bet from a reg is almost never a bluff. You should try bet/bet/check instead depending on what you think V has. Bet/check/bet is ok OOP though since we can get value from floats.

bet/bet check usually gets folds on the turn from hands that I want to pay me on 2 streets like tpwk and mid pairs. Plus, they almost always check behind weaker hands and always bet stronger hands and bluffs which I nearly have to call (player dependent). I feel like I lose value and useful info from a bet/bet/check line. If i'm betting the flop and turn for value, i'm also most likely bet/folding the river for value.

Villain ended up having and I scooped the pot. I'm not really following why I should c-bet this flop when I likely have him dominated. V would fold to a $5 bet on that flop with no pair no draw. By giving V a chance to catch up, I think I extract more value.

My initial plan was to c/c, c/c, bet assuming an uncoordinated board where AQ would normally be good. However, with V not betting the flop I wanted to give him a chance to put in a bet on the turn. By checking the turn, I am now representing missed overs like JT, JQ, KQ. When he bets $25 I now range him on 99, TT, 89, T8 as I don't think a 6 would bet that hard and I got a tell that he was trying to steal the pot right there, so I min-raised because I thought that gave me the best chance to get 1 more oversized bet out of him there and a small value bet on the river.

I'm a 95% favorite on the flop and an 88% favorite on the turn. If he sucks out on me with two pair, so be it but playing this unorthodox seemed to provide more value and I would like opinions on how to maximize value while playing this unorthodox - not just ABC c-bet flop win $10.

V said "your check and check raise really threw me off. I thought you were bluffing." If someone can explain how I could have gotten more money out of 89o here I'm all ears.

Johnny, your thinking is a bit results oriented. The most common tendency of LLSNL players, by far, is to call. Normal opponents won't bluff or value bet thinly enough imo, especially on A high boards.

You do realize your entire line of thinking here is results oriented right? It doesn't matter how you maximize value vs 89off that fortunately binked a pair on the turn. What matters is how you maximize value over the long term. Checking two streets is terribad.

Even if we knew villain had exactly 89 a bet turn line would still be preferable but as I stated that is not as important as maximizing your value over a large sample size. BTW, if this guy is bad enough to call with 89off pre then I'm definitely looking to get 3 streets of value from him.

BTW, it should be noted that Villain couldn't fold 89off pre. He couldn't fold 2nd pair to a check raise on the turn, and he couldn't fold 2nd pair on the river when practically every other 2nd pair beats him. This guy is not folding to a cbet if he flops a pair.

i dont mind the passive line , when you raise utg then bet the Axx flop, you have exactly what you represent. so by checking i like that you get some bluffs/value out of people who would just otherwise lay down to your bet.

but you have to stick with the plan. if you played this way to get value from weak hands then you can see it makes no sense to raise the turn. most guys are gonna fold to that checkraise unless they have a huge hand. so no point, you just prevent him from bluffing river. just call turn and probably check call river.

So maybe my sample size is small trying out different ways to play TPGK OOP but in my experience, when I lead this flop, if a V doesn't have an Ace he is folding. When I "give up" aggression as the PF raiser (and I only try this play when I am the PF raiser) V's have a tendency to think the pot is theirs for the taking. Why is there such vitriol against allowing a V to catch up? If he bets, I am obviously calling and then deciding on c/c or betting the turn based on texture.

But if V doesn't have anything on the flop and will fold to a c-bet than what difference does it make if I wait until the turn to get value? I have a pair. I'm not getting married to my hand. If he hits runner runner good for him but this line at least allows him to think he has the best hand.

He played 89o. Would he play 67o? Would he call a flop c-bet and a turn bet when he now has 3rd pair? I don't know. I don't think so. How would you not put me on an Ace with raising UTG and betting the flop and turn? Maybe it was pure luck but I like to think I had a small part in manipulating this guy to putting in $107 with 89o.

If most people would fold to the CR than shouldn't I be looking to exploit everyone under the sun HU with a min-raise CR when I miss flops and turns? I wanted the CR to look like a bluff. I think CR to $75 would have been way too high to accomplish that.

Johnny,

I think you are really just missing the point on the whole. The question isn't how could you have made an extra $20 off this guy in this hand. The question is how can I play better in the future in this same type of scenario, earning you the most money in the long run.

Criticism can be hard to hear, but seems like good advice so far ITT. LLSNL is all about value, value, value.

I appreciate advice and criticism to an extent. I guess I'll refrain from posting hands where I intentionally deviate from a tight ABC strategy for meta-game purposes. I thought it would be occasionally useful to play hands in an unorthodox manner for purposes of image and making people unsure of what your actions mean.

But it sounds like a lot of this stuff is irrelevant at $1/2 either because the player pool is so deep that you aren't always playing regs and thus don't need to randomize your image or the pool is just bad and you can achieve a nice win rate just playing basic sound strategy.

It's just when you c-bet enough flops like this only to see it get folded it makes you start to wonder if there is a better way and that is what I was out to find out.

How would they not put you on an ace? Hell if I know how a fish thinks. Often times I question whether they think at all. However, in general they are probably thinking "oooh I flopped a pair and improved my hand" and "he might be bluffing and if he isn't I have outs" Who knows though. What was he thinking when he called your check raise on the turn which is much scarier than a flop cbet? Or why did he call the river when he could beat nothing. Who knows?!?

Fact is that a guy like this will call with hands like bottom pair, pocket pairs, and probably even gutshots so lets get 3 streets of value from him. Live players are notorious for pealing light.

Vs the vast majority of villains you will want to take a bet bet bet line. Don't worry about what they are thinking. They will make mistakes and you will get paid because of it. Against good grinders and against super bluffy aggro players (fairly rare) then checking the flop may be warranted. However, you can't check it down to the river. If villain checks the flop a bet on the turn is absolutely mandatory for value and to protect our hand.

This is a really interesting idea/discussion. Here are my thoughts:

For the hand, I like the flop check but don't like the turn check at all. And I think the x/raise is worse. Now that you've disguised your hand with the flop check, I think it's bet/call (depends on size and turn card) turn and bet/fold river. Check raising the turn overreps our hand and can actually get less value than a bet/bet line since with the x/minraise line he folds more on the river.

Generally speaking, there are a few factors that should influence whether we check the flop or not:

1) Board texture. It must be dry. On a wet board texture we want to bet since he's more likely to make an incorrect call with a draw. If we were playing higher level poker we might want to risk the occasional check on a wet board texture to be unpredictable, but at this level, never.

2) Number of opponents. We should only do this against 1 opponent. There might be situations where it's good against 2 but they will be very rare.

3) Our image. If we are losing, we should never do this because they will call us for so many reasons. We should only do this when winning.

Theoretically, the laggier our image is the less we should do this, but I think our lag image/cbet% is definitely the smallest factor on the list. (75% aren't paying attention, and of 90% of those who are don't adjust anyway.)

4) Opponent type. This is the most important factor.

We should never check the flop against calling stations.

We should never check to people who float. These villains are rare where I play the ones I've seen are predictable and easy to spot. Against them, we check the turn for obvious reasons.

There are some players who call preflop with ANY ace. They aren't hard to spot. Look for people who call a raise from LP and showdown A7o. Against them, We should bet every street, flop included.

We should check the flop against aggro villains who like to level themselves and steal pots. Against a major lagtard maniac, my favorite line would be to check every street and tank/call every raise he makes. Many opponents will sense weakness, put you on a KK or QQ that hates the ace, and want to force you to fold it. Let them barrel every street with their air and don't let them know you have a hand by raising. I've done this a couple of times against lagtards who were playing every hand/triple barreling. You can make lots and LOTS of money with this move, much more than if you take control of the action and set off their alarm bells.

We should check to pseudo-thinking opponents who will say "you can't have an ace" when you check the flop then station up on the turn and river. Our primary targets with this move. These straightforward ABCers will fold 2nd pair to a flop c-bet automatically but will call turn and river bets with that same pair. They are not rare. Unlike the A7o villains, there is no obvious tell to distinguish these. But we can sniff them out. Look for players who like to show down in small/medium pots with marginal holdings and look for players who call with less than top pair when the action has been weak. Also look for players who call in similar situations (calls down with TPNK). Correct line: x flop; b/c or b/f turn; b/f most rivers.

There may be other profitable player types to check the flop to but so far this is what come to mind (if you have ideas please share them).

And now the final point of the tl;dr post: will we be doing this often? Definitely not. We will usually have the wrong opponent, wrong image, or wrong board texture. Maybe we'll end up checking the flop OOP with TPGK+ one out of ten times, which may be once every 30 hours of play. But I think there are situations that warrant it, and where we can make a lot more money than playing our automatical style. I think this would be one example of a difference between ABC an ABCD poker.