Dang...somebody ship Devin a walking stick.

Does ur villain have a range? U should be playing against a range...not trying to win the smallest pots!

Wow, this thread has generated a lot of really good responses, thanks for all of the help. In the future I won't post results in the opening post. After reading, and thinking about this some more, it seems like we don't really need to worry about controlling the pot size as much against your typical fish. The typical fish is going to check-raise so infrequently on the turn that we should just go ahead and bet, and if they draw out, that's poker. If we read out opponent to be a better player (or crazy aggressive) it could be better to check back the turn because we're going to be in a tough spot if we get check-raised. Also be more inclined to keep betting when the board has more draws possible because it's a bigger mistake to let a flush draw see the river for free than a hand that has only 2-5 outs. Do I have this about right?

Is this real life? We don't have "TP or oven less".. we have an over pair

this.

Villians at these stakes tend to be loose passive- and this villain hasn't shown that he is any different. Overvaluing TP( Like he did in that previous hand you mentioned) does not count as "good aggressive" IMO, and bluff( or even better, semi- bluff) raising you on this turn to get you off of an overpair/ TP would be good aggressive at these stakes. Don't believe your being exploited unless the villain demonstrates the ability to exploit you.. if he raises that's because he has two pairs or a set and you're beat..

You bet here, 100% of the time, and it's not even close.

Yes, your villain might call, hit some weak ass one-card draw, and punish you on the river. But the VAST majority of the time, he calls you with that weak ass one card draw, and misses, and now you've been paid.

Yes, sometimes, he will have flopped a set on you, or some other unlikely made hand.

Look at this hand as an example. Say you bet $120 on the turn. If your villain has decided, "hey, he might have AK/AQ, and I might be ahead already,and if not, I still have 6 outs versus his overpair..." We know that's ******ed, but MANY villains think like this, and will call your $120. They will also call with TT, 99, A8, 78, XdXd...all of those holdings are much more likely than being up against a made hand here.

You have a good hand, but there are 6 cards out there that can beat you, and any diamond gives your villain a great chance to bluff at you. Why give a free draw to those cards?

We win at poker, especially small stakes, by betting relentlessly, and making our opponents pay dearly to draw.

You exercise pot control when you have KK on an Ace high board. When you have middle pair, top kicker, and you're not sure where you stand. When you have AA on a KQJ board in a raised pot. When you have a one card straight flush draw and nothing to go with it.

Overpair on a drawy, rag board? This is when we punish!!! Don't let Adxd get there for free! Don't let 66 hit a 6 or a 7 on you for free!

I honestly do not think it would be possible to be a winning long term player if we are not extracting value in these spots.

Yeah, pot controlling in OP's spot is just ridiculous to me. I want value from my premiums so I'm bet/betting until I have a feeling I can be beat. This also balances my double barrels.... obv.

If you pot control over pairs a lot then you're checking back the turn a lot. This means that your range for 2 barreling becomes very polarized and polarized ranges are pretty easy to play against. And this is not even mentioning the fact that you're giving villains TWO cards for the price of ONE!!! That actually makes it less of a mistake for them to peel lightly on the flop if you're often not charging them to see the river.


A quick example of pot-control that comes to mind is if you c-bet with AA on TTQ board or something and get a guy OOP to call. A lot of guys don't snap check/raise any Tx there (at least deep in 5/10 where I play) so checking back turn is fine and reevaluating river.

If you never pot control at LLSNL you'll be better off. It's one of the most overrated concepts in poker because people don't understand it. Most of the time, it's just a term for showdown monkey-ness (no offense to OP, I'm talking about players in general).

Pot control is only an issue WHEN YOU'RE LIKELY TO GET BLUFFED.

Classic "pot control" example from the Harrington book. You have AA. You pot flop, pot turn, villain donk shoves into you on the river. Villain is competent enough to do this with a busted draw or a set, so you don't know what to do.

But in LLSNL villains don't do that. They're going to play their hand face up. They're going to c/f the river if they bricked out, or if they're going to bluff they'll make some tiny bet into you b/c they're fish.

In LLSNL there are a ton of situations where "pot odds" are not even relevant because in so many spots villains just never bluff. So you could be getting 3-1 on the river, but you're just never good because they always have what they're repping.

So in this spot, just bet the turn. If you get shoved on, fold.

im not a fan of going the pot control route when i have a vulnerable hand that is going to hate a lot of river cards

bet fold the turn

if you want to pot control do it by checking back the riv, which i would do if he check calls turn unless the riv is a total blank like a 4, 2 or you make top set

change it to a rainbow board then MAYBE you could consider checking the turn

but somehow it ended up being the right play in this particular spot

bet/CALL the turn

bet/fold imo. don't see avg players check/shoving with semi bluff or worse hands that often. at least not in my games.

If you take this line your a station

If you take a "pot control" line in this spot your weak-tight postflop- so don't call yourself a TAG lol

think maybe w/ your image SABR this is true but standard player here isn't really c/r the turn w much that we beat unless they decide to spazz w/ like some random over pair here, the turn doesn't really bring much in the way of draws villain might semi-bluff with (if he is even capable of that).

turn should be a bet IMO, and a fold if raises vs most villains

if villain c/c turn then bombs a obv bad river card (or a 3) prob a fold IME.

Grunch,

I struggle with JJ in situations like this as well. We gave a free card but induced a bluff on the river that he may or may not have made if we didn't give the free card.

I think you determined at the end that you were probably ahead of most his range. Without stoving it, let's see you estimate that you have about 70% equity. If you would have bet the pot and he called, you would have been committed no mater what the river was.

If you decide you are committed, then I think you bet the turn for value. But your check may have maximized your value for the hand since you were able to bluff catch.

Overall, well-played I think.

Seems like nobody knows what real pot control is. Bet flop and check turn is not the only way to pot control. You can be creative with your bet sizing and control the size of the pot. You can bet, bet check for pot control. You can check back flops and pot control.

Be creative op.

Doesn't OP state that villain went all-in on the turn with top pair crap kicker?

How is this not an obvious bet/call when you get this wonderful turn card? Am I missing something?

I'm also jamming the river.

I mean your hand = AA here and his line is telling you that he has worse.

Your turn check underrepped your hand, and he may think you're FOS.

To nit pick a bit, if you are likely to get bluff you still shouldn't pot control. You should just b/c because it'd be hugely +EV. It's when you are unsure of the frequency you get bluffed at, but know that the villain is capable of bluffing.

After the flop checked through, and there were no over pairs to his pair of As. We also weren't given much detail. I think it'd be big mistake to assume he does this after getting raised pre and double barreled.

We should pot control when villain is not likely to call with worse and will more likely raise with better/bluffs (to the point where if we bet a good hand that we are not comfortable getting it in with we are making a mistake). So we pot control to widen his range allowing for the possibility for future value (induce bluffs, villain calling light on future streets).