Hero (covers). Been at table for about an hour. Doubled up on firsthand with BD flush vs top two and continued with aggressive winning image. Table has been playing passive so opening wide IP but haven't shown it down many hands.
Villain ($500). Hasn't done anything of note. Seems solid but not been too aggro or too tight. Probably just hasn't had any spots in last hour. 30's white.
Preflop: V limps MP. Hero $25 with Js8s OTB. V calls.
Flop ($55) Qh Ts 6s. V checks. Hero cbets $35. V calls. I am planning to double barrel a lot of turns.
Turn ($125). Qh Ts 6s 7h. V now leads for $80 with $360 left. Call or raise?
The double gutter with 98 hit but I read his bet more as a protection on a board getting wetter.
you didn't turn more outs btw, it's close ott, I'd probably just jam, I think there is enough fe to jam the turn, if we'd just call we would have around 30% equity, but if we jam it'd be around 64%, shoving the turn would be a more profitable play over the long run as to just calling to complete our draw.
I disagree with post #4. I think in order to make jamming correct you need to manufacture a fold near 50% of the time. I'll try and work out why I think so...
Assuming the original posters has ~23% equity, which seems reasonable, 12 outs is like 26%, but, they're not all clean, although he shouldn't be getting over-flushed a lot since the opponent limped in pre-flop. Regardless, I think the EV of a turn call, without any implied odds, is:
EV = (his equity * pot size) - (opponents equity * cost of call)
EV = (0.235 * 285) - (0.765 * 80)
EV= $5.77
If I assume the opponent always bet/calls the turn, the EV of a turn shove I think is:
EV = (his equity)(pot + cost of opponent call) - (opponents equity * cost of opponents call)
EV = (0.235 * (285 + 360)) - ((1 - 0.235) * 360)
EV = - $123.83
So I think that in order for a big semi-bluff to be profitable he would need to manufacture a decent amount of fold equity, enough so that the EV is greater than $5.77 to make it superior to calling. To solve for that needed fold-equity I would do something like:
EV = (opponent fold% * pot size) + (1 - opponent fold%) * ((his equity * (pot size + cost of opponent call)) - ((1 - his equity) * cost of opponent call))
5.77 = (x * 285) + (1 - x) * ((0.235 * (285 + 360)) - ((1- 0.235) * 360))
x = 0.317
So I believe your opponent would need to fold more than 31% of the time to make a large semi-bluff a smarter play than calling the turn bet. However, once the implied odds for a turn call are taken into effect, the EV of a turn call is probably closer to $40 vs. $5.77 - therefore, the required fold equity he would need to generate to have a similar expectation would be closer to 40% vs %32. So I was wrong, not quite, half the time, but in order to make semi-bluffing the turn for the original posters stack correct, he would have to hope to get a fold roughly 40% of the time.
I think it would do all of us some good to try and come up with a range of hands your opponents leads the turn with and then we can try and narrow it down to the hands the opponent calls a shove with and from there we can see if it is around 40%.
I think the opponent would need to be betting the turn with a lot of hands like Tx, Qx, 77-99 and weak draws. I just can't see that being likely, since: A) a lot of those hands should raise pre-flop. B) Some of those fold the flop and C) A lot of those hands have some equity and likely bluff-catch again or try for a freebie on the turn when they pray it checks through. I think the opponents turn leading range is mostly hands he thinks are for value {sets, straights, two pair} and turned strong draws {pair+hearts, straight draw + flush draw, pair + spades}. I think it's a leap to assume the opponent is going to bet/fold the turn to essentially see where he is at with a weak holding. I just don't think there are enough one-pair hands (w/o redraws) and weak draws, that bet the turn with the intention to fold. However, maybe my assumption is wrong and it is certainly likely. I'm trying hard to work on my hand reading, but, it still poor.
Anyways having said all that, I think calling the turn is better than making a large semi-bluff, especially since there isn't a great read on the opponent. Yet, I'd be willing to change my opinion if a good hand breakdown can be explained showing the types of hands he may bet/fold on the turn.
I think working out these types of hands is helpful because it builds intuition. It's not like you're going to do all this math and hand elimination stuff at the table. Yet, the more we do it away from the table, the better our "gut" becomes at the table. I feel once we learn the rationalization for things, our instincts are frequently "close enough" as we experience it time and time again at the tables.
^ great analysis Ahutz. I am a math guy too, and agree that working on it away from the table builds intuition at the tables. With the fold equity needed, I would have to be pretty confident that he is leading with Qx, Tx type hands and is able to fold these to a raise. I'm not sure if it is there so it does seem like calling is best.
