I advocated a PSB on the flop because i think against a decent player, who knows weere competant, a cr is really transparent. Im pretty surprised i was in the minority, as i think betting this flop is pretty standard.

Now that we've checked the flop though, i think we ought to check the turn as well. If he was checking for pot control with an ace of some type he might come alive now. If he had air, he might also come alive now, that youve checked twice to him. If he bets, i like call/lead river but i dont hate a checkraise

Leading here is even more transparent than leading flop -- it looks like exactly what it is: you went for a cr on the flop, didnt get it, so now youre betting turn.

grunch
I advocated a PSB on the flop because i think against a decent player, who knows weere competant, a cr is really transparent. Im pretty surprised i was in the minority, as i think betting this flop is pretty standard.

Now that we've checked the flop though, i think we ought to check the turn as well. If he was checking for pot control with an ace of some type he might come alive now. If he had air, he might also come alive now, that youve checked twice to him.

Leading here is even more transparent than leading flop -- it looks like exactly what it is you went for a cr on the flop, didnt get it, so now youre betting turn.

By the way, I don't want to derail this thread, but didn't we have another KUD thread where villain check-called flop and then led turn, and lots of people were saying this is a terrible line for any hand? (I had a thread where I took a line of check/call flop, bet turn, and everyone told me I took a bad line as well.) Yet here in this thread I see a bunch of responses saying check/call flop and lead turn is good. Am I imagining things?

I like the discussion this generated.

Pf, Hero actually has a dilemma. To me, 3betting light is 3betting in this situation maybe 5%-6% of hands. If you 4bet, he narrows your range to QQ+ (maybe adds AK with history). Against that you fold most of his range (75%) and your equity against a shove is 30% or so

Therefore, the EV calculation is:

EV = 0.75 * $49 + 0.25 * ($284 * 0.3 - $256 * 0.7)
EV= $13.25

So 4bet stacking off is +EV.

If Hero flats, the calculation gets complicated. Hero is a 60/40 favorite against a 3bet light range. By calling, Hero should normally see a cbet, let's assume $50.

EV = 0.2 * $175 = $35

While position has value, the lower the SPR, the less important position is. In addition, Hero will have virtual position on the flop, where the big decision is going to be anyway. If Hero continues after the flop facing a bet, the stacks are going in anyway and position doesn't matter.

I think flatting is the higher value move. It is going to depend how comfortable Hero believes he'll be on the flop. If Hero is uncomfortable making the decision on the flop, it is better to just 4bet/call.

Flop is an easy check. Hero has the villain's range crushed, 87/13. A bet by Hero is going fold out over 1/2 of the villain's range. Unless the villain is trapping with AA, he should be betting over 2/3 of his range for value. Hero's range to him should be 88-QQ, so he'll cbet much of his other holdings to get the fold. A donk bet is going to say set to him.

As he didn't bet the flop, I'd lead the turn. If he has nothing, he isn't betting the turn either. Hero should be looking to get value out of the villain's Ax hands. He might not bet them, but he won't fold either on the turn.

Oh, for those thinking, "Venice cheated, he waited until he saw all the posts," mods can see deleted posts anyway.

It really should not come as a surprise since donking the flop is pretty bad.

notes: Hero flats pre to keep the laggy-ish players range wide, leaving villain with initiative. All this points to allowing villain to cbet air, and what better board to cbet air than a Axx flop? Donking this flop just turns the gun back around on yourself and fires away.

I would doubt it, since c/c ...bet turn is an optimal play in many circumstances.(specifically once you capture a cbet, but know the villain will check back a ton of his range which could have reasonable equity going into the river, then hero should lead turn.)

NG

What happened to the notion of getting the money in good? Between players with this much history a bet from hero on the flop is much more confusing to villain than a comfortable check/check line.
If he has nothing you will not make any real money anyway and checking the flop is just so "been there done that" that villain will only cbet his air and there is not much chance he has nothing here.
IMHO, lead out your strong hands for disguise. You have called the 3bet which shows some strength so a lead here is in line with having or representing (same as a cbet). Too many players slowplay good holdings and lose value. Sure, you induce villain to bet on occasion but then you only shut him down with a call or reraise unless he has the strength of hand which will call or raise your lead bet anyway! You are not playing this hand to get one bet from villain, you want his stack. Lead, lead, lead....

If he's as aggro as you say, I think the easiest play here is to c/c the flop and c/c his turn shove. We aren't worried about pretty much any draws (hard to put him on KJ here). He's super aggro so I don't think he'll slow down. If he's got KK then he's probably willing to fire at the flop once but i don't think you'll get anything else out of him.

Just lead turn. He was either trapping with a check/back on the flop or is already shutting down. If he's got a draw I don't want to give him a 2nd free card. You may be able to get him to call with Axs. $50 on the turn, have a nice day, hope he's got 77.

I think this type of hand was perfect for a NG trial. The more general and conceptual, I suspect, the better the *NG* concept works. Versus more elaborate circumstances I doubt it'd work as well: e.g. Hero is OTT behind two little-known Vils, something inexplicably weird just happened, what now ?

With the OP's description of himself and Vil, we generated two legitimate lines of thought centered around the central question: HOW f.o.s. did Vil view hero.

Though LLSNL threads seldom are so self-contained within the OP, this one had significant prior history AND between thinking players. There was less need of a rhetorical method and additional/clarifying info from the OPer.

This NG thread was awesome!

ya, after i grunched, i reread OP, and decided that the donk bet OTF may not be the optimal play, like you are saying.

however, if a bet is small enough, isn't it in effect the same as a check in a 3-bet pot??

Its tough for me to believe that leading turn gives us a better % of being called then checkings turn and really under repping our hand which I believe increases our value on river.

Not to mention he should be betting all pairs after we check flop and turn...but when we lead to me this looks strong as if we were looking for a c/r on flop missed our chance so now we lead. I'm pretty sure he's already suspicious of that flop...

Overbet the turn, like $125 and ship the river blind with a laugh.

I would never bet flop. Check for sure, he'll bet almost anything here. Even maybe KK to see where he is.

Call flop bet, c/r turn.

Vil obv doesnt have a very strong hand or he has AA. if we check turn we might get a PSB on the river but unless he hits a set or a weird str8 i cant see him betting or calling a big bet to us OTR.

I say we lead for 35 here. If hes on a draw he still calls us and with the description of VIl being tricky this gives him a perfect spot to float or make a move on us.

Our goal right now is to keep Vils whole range in right? if check OTT and he checks back hes not paying us off on any kind of missed draw OBV and the allure of just checking it back if we check river to him is too big. So lets bet for smallish/value OTT.

This is true. But it isn't the way to maximize our winnings. Our EV is coming from his range where he has TP or 2P and is going to call two streets of bets.

Let's say we plan on 2/3 PSB on the turn and river. If he calls one, we win 2/3 of a flop pot. If he calls the turn and river, we win 2/3 + 14/9 or over 2 flop pots. The range of hands that will fold the turn, but call the river is never going to be 3 times greater than the hands he'll call the turn and river.

as played I just lead the turn now. Near pot sized bet, gotta make up for the flop check behind. If he's got KK or JJ it doesn't matter anyway he's folding whether we bet big or small.

Venice...this guys post is kind of what I'm trying to say...except the exact opposite. If he has these hands we aren't getting much action at all...and by checking hopefully we induce some attempts at thin value bets from villian.

I guess I see him as rarely having tp here given action...and if he has anything stronger then tp he's always betting turn and we obviously get it in.

I also think that with any under pair he holds which I think is majority of time or pure air he folds to any turn bet as our line being oop looks strong.

Trust me I hate playing This so passively...but if we play our villians holdings given action we can plan accordingly.

I guess my point is if he has a big hand its all going in given stacks...if he doesn't to me we are only getting one street of value most of the time...so what's the greater % we get called on turn rather then river?


Maybe I'm wrong thinking this?

Select a bet-size that targets the villain's range in such a way that he calls with as much of his range as possible, and gives plenty of room for villain to spazz. Note: Villain likely doesn't have a large part of his range containing hands strong enough to call ~pot.

Villain's range is pretty wide, and contains ALOT of hands that fold to a pot-sized bet. Bet weak to target this part of part of his range {88, ect.}, and give him the opportunity to spazz and try to bluff us off a perceived blocking-bet/weak line.

(For the record, no need to balance against live fish.)

~$27

A pot sized bet would be a huge mistake. Even 2/3rd pot is very wrong b/c he folds out a HUGE percent of his range to this. Hero wants a call.

And, don't be afraid to do something that might seem ridiculous, and bet ~$15. I'm not kidding, that is fat value, and gets called by {KJ}. And it doesn't need to be balanced against live fish.

Got to think about the dynamic driving this hand with this action. The villain and hero have a friendly contest going on here "who can out play the other".

It starts going round and round. Bottom line one of two things are going to happen in the rest of this hand. 1) The villain is done with the hand, he is not calling OTT or OTR or 2) He is going to continue with his hand and may even have a legit hand, in which case he is calling/raising OTT and OTR.

So out of those two options I would rather try to get more money, hence my line of overbetting OTT, which might just triigger the "oh he is trying to out play me! Ha! Aint happening buddy!".

I know where you are coming from in that line of thinking, but IME there just isn't the value you think there is in that reluctant river call after checking it thru twice in a 3-bet pot. I would rather give the villain a chance to spaz instead of allowing for a possible small bet and call some of the time.

^ I can come to terms with this and agree

something's not right here but it's been way too long of a day for me to figure it out

Grunch

It's quite okay to 4 bet here, It's also more standard to call.

I like to call something like 60-80% of the time.

If you never 4 bet here you've got to consider.

So... what's your 4 bet range.. AA and KK?

Lots of folks in 1/2NL never 4 bet anything but KK+.
This is a huge leak if you move up in stakes to stakes where people pay attention (5/10-10/20).

It's probably okay to 4 bet only 1% of your range in 1/2. But in you want to move up you should widen your range.

Did you bring your broomstick?

Stack to pot ratio is a little over 3. So there are 2 bets left.

Any reasonable bet pushes it over the pot commitment threshold.

Think.

Do you want to play a 1 bet hand... or a 2 bet hand.

Are you a good witch or a bad witch?



If he has nothing, we want to let him continue to bluff and pick up an extra bet.

If he has something we want to get his whole stack...


I like to bet 70% of the time, and check 30% of the time. Base this on your read of the player at the table.

If we bet and he raises then all the money goes in, we get to Oz.

If we bet and he calls, we put the second bet in on the turn 90% of the time.

If we check and he bets we get it all in.

If we check and he checks, we are going to donk the turn 80% of the time.

As far as bet sizing goes, I would only rarely make a probe sized bet (30%) of the pot. Most of the time I'll put in a value bet size. 20% of the time I'll overbet the pot and make it look bluffy.

*Post Grunch*

Humm it seems I disagree with just about everyone here.

I'm not focusing on getting and extra bet. I'm pushing hard to win his stack.

$270eff.

Hero in MP w/QcQh
EP calls $2, Hero raises to $12, Villain raises to $35, Hero calls $23

Flop: AhQd9c
$75 (2 Players) Hero checks, Villain checks

Turn: 7x
$75 (2 Players) Hero checks, Villain checks (!?!)

- he has nothing or he has KK, JJ, TT, etc. and is scared that I am still trapping

River: 7x
$75 (2 Players) Hero? [~$235 behind]

check again, small bet, overbet, shove... thoughts?