Villain can barely spell "poker." Seriously, has no idea what he's doing. Min-3-bets Q9o/A4s, calls smallish 4-bet with the latter; his raise-sizing is all over the place; he made it 100 to go on the first hand then flashed A2o when I folded, like a first timer who's dealt KK and is so excited he wants to show it, except it was Ace frakking two offsuit.

But even against this drool bucket (and I totally respect him as a human being, mistake me not), I could not for the life of me come up with a reasonable flop, turn, river plan with 99. Even as I began 3-betting it, I was like, uh, I'm doing what now post-flop?

Poker Stars $30.00+$1.50 No Limit Hold'em Tournament - t15/t30 Blinds - 2 players
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter Powered By DeucesCracked.com

BTN/SB: t1100 M = 24.44
Hero (BB): t1900 M = 42.22

Pre Flop: (t45) Hero is BB with 9 9
BTN/SB raises to t60, Hero raises to t150, BTN/SB calls t90

Flop: (t300) 8 K 5 (2 players)
Hero bets t150, BTN/SB calls t150

Turn: (t600) 5 (2 players)
Hero bets t300, BTN/SB calls t300

River: (t1200) J (2 players)
Hero ?


So yeah, no idea what I'm doing post-flop. Flop bet is standard and for value right? But should be bigger than 1/2 pot? Seems bad to make it too big. Turn is a bet again? How big? And river is a check? A bet?

Somebody please help me. I can't spell "poker" either.

Raise more pr flop because players who can't spell poker will call down light anyway, so get more value out of your hand straight away.

flop bet is pretty std although i'd personally bet a little more.

I'd need more reads on villains general play post-flop before i could give you a line for turn on.

Yeah, what were his post flop tendencies prior to this?
Please 3-bet more pre, i always make it 200 over a 60 open. I mean that board texture is reasonably gross to be OOP in a 3bet pot obv. so i sometimes c/c the flop or am happy when he checks behind and try to get to SD. If i'm c/c i'm generally trying to establish a read based on bet sizing and how he had reacted previously...

His post-flop tendencies? He was basically a station post-flop who occasionally turned his hands into bluffs or made illogical blocking bets. That was why it felt better to bet than to check. I guessed he'd come along quietly with middle pair, an underpair, and any club. I was totally confused, though, about how to balance my stack-to-pot ratio with betting for value/protection and not giving him awesome odds with all of his club hands.

What about this for a better thin value line: I cbet 225 on flop; if called, turn pot size is 750, and the remaining effective stack is 725. On a blank turn, I just stick the rest of my stack in.

Gah, 99 seems tough to 3-bet 35bbs deep. So many less than awesome boards come down post-flop and you basically have to soul-read villain OOP to minimize all the errors that can ensue:
1) bet/folding incorrectly, which is highly likely w/o laser reads cause we're so shallow that it sucks to put more chips in then fold
2) value-owning ourselves by getting it in on K high, Q high, J high type boards vs the wrong kind of villain
3) checking down ugly boards and giving villains the free cards they need

Really, that much? Seems to make things even more awkward post if we're not > 50 bbs deep. Do you rarely 3-bet light, or do you do so that big relative to the open raise? And at what stack depth do you stop making it 200 over a 60 open and just 3-bet shove instead?

I'm seriously beginning to think I should size my 3-bets relative not only to the open-raise, but to the effective stack depth, if I'm not 3-bet shoving. Like possibly I should have made it 135 here pre-flop. That way I gain a little more freedom post.

Tell me how I'm wrong.

Hands like this hurt my brain... this is not an easy situation by any means.

By the river my insides are hurting and i'm just wanting to see a showdown as cheaply as possible. I agree with keeping the pot smaller preflop against the type of opponent you described, and i like the smallish 3-bet and half-pot bets on the flop and turn.

I think the river is a check-call. You're ahead of a large portion of what his range could conceivably be, but there's no reason to bet the world on it. If Villain is that bad, he's probably making the same mistake i see from a ton of bad players in value-betting (or dark tunnel bluffing) marginal hands on the river like 8-X, ace high, rags.

It's hands like this that make you appreciate how important position is in this game... when in position this hand works like clockwork. OOP, it works like two trains full of accordians smashing into each other.

Is he the type who will bet no matter what at the first sign of weakness? If not, I think you can check turn and try to show down.

Totally describes my state of mind during the hand.

I'm used to 3-betting with deeper stacks, coming from a cash game background, and have a better sense of how to maneuver with 99 OOP against someone with a wide range on an ugly texture. (Here, fortunately, villain was so bad/passive it didn't matter.)

It feels like for SNGs I have to keep a close eye on stack depth (and villain tendencies) when deciding to 3-bet 99 / AJs type stuff vs loose callers, and design my sizes such that I have a clear plan of action post-flop. For example, I might 3-bet big at 30 BBs if I just want to do a 'go-and-go' against a certain stationy/bad villain and open-ship any flop. Whereas I might want to 3-bet smaller for value against someone else such that I have the option of c-bet/folding post-flop without it being a disaster.

I don't know, I'll have to think about this stuff more.

-i would prefer a call preflop. 3bet is ok, but then 3 bet bigger to increase likelyhood of a fold, because you will likely have to face overcards on flop.

-flop: i like a bet against an aggressive opponent. to keep the lead, because if you check an aggressive opponent would probably bet the monochrome board with any 2. against a non-aggressive player on this board i would prefer check/calling for pot control reasons.
against a big fish, with my chip lead, i would check/call for pot control. it's a dangerous and marginal spot. i don't want to risk wasting my edge.

-turn: i don't like a turn bet.
when you get called on flop, your (very bad) opponent range is very wide: K,5,8,Ax with a club, any club, Ax air, TT+ are all in his range.
when you bet on turn you don't really know what are you getting yourself into. and another problem is that if you look at pot and stack size, you're getting him pot commited... and your half pot bet is too small to have fold equity. this player would call with a draw or a K..., and another 5 certainly doesn't scare him.
i wouldn't be comfortable facing another street of betting (all in) with 99 on a K high and 3 clubs board.

i would check turn. with the intention to check/call river if no clubs hit.
not much reason to bet river with 99 because worse would rarely call.

^Thanks, your advice looks sensible, though I have to think about the "3-bet bigger to increase likelihood of a fold" part through. Otherwise, the rest has given some clarity to the spot I described in my original post.

Check the river and make a decision based on his timing and bet sizing. Should be a pretty easy intuitive decision to call or fold (based on these two factors alone) if he is as bad as you say. Sometimes I play the flop and turn differently but I think your line is fine. I also 3 bet a little bigger

call pre flop? what?

are we waiting for aces here?

we crush his range, raise more pre flop and he'll call down super light if he's bad as you say.

why would you do that? i thought i was a nit lolz

make it 180 to go or 200, i prefer 180 here.

You'll take down a lot of pots by just leading out here after he calls, +ev +ev +ev +ev

like every1 says here, droolers call you light, make preflop 210, and make flop raise 450 to set up a shove on nearly every turn.

infact vs this villain, in a 3-bet pot I might c/raise all in the flop.. depends on situation. Still definately 3-betting, calling is bad..

The weaker the player, the less frequently you should be 3 betting. There's no reason really to 3 bet this preflop. It's not a terrible play (although you should raise more imo if you do 3bet), but you are up against a player who you feel you are fundamentally much better then. Keep the pots small and take him to value town.

As played preflop, I certainly prefer a check/call on the flop and turn/river value bets if he checks behind.

A lot of the advice I've seen so far has been pushing bigger raises and bets. I have to disagree in general with this strategy especially against this kind of player.

Against weak players, keeping the pots small is usually more important than making them pay to see extra cards.

I would actually think this would be a more appropriate against a tougher villain. Someone who you aren't sure you'll be able to get it in good against in the future. It's unnecessary to make this kind of high risk play against a weak opponent. (And based on the description "weak" is an understatement)

c/c > c/f > betting

So you play small ball to what level exactly? 50/100?

You should take a +ev edge whenever you can in this game. If you want to play small pots and avoid raising in this situation, then there is a good game out there, it's called no blind increase

I actually play small ball, it's my style against most players. But i 3-bet this hand every time. The blinds are 15/30 and we haven't got all day to play small ball. We crush his range and we should 3-bet this like ALWAYS imo.

The weaker the player, the more comfortable you should be post-flop.

Small ball until 25/50.

What are the blind levels for the no blind increase matches? 15/30 right?

If we are more comfortable post flop, then why should we be putting so much in preflop.

Even if we do 3bet, I can't see how getting in on that flop against this player is ever a good play. It's a pretty bad flop... I can't see a checkraise all-in against this guy ever making sense.

I certainly am ok with the 3bet (although I would rarely do it), but against a player this bad I don't see why it is necessary. Even if it the highest chip ev play for the hand, it may not be the highest ev in terms of winning the match.

I check the flop here a lot but as played I would probably c/c the river.

So in theory we should just limp every button as well?

I like that there are varied perspectives in the thread for me to think about.

A lot of the difficulty for me is in sorting out the different priorities that exist in this spot.

1) We're out of position with 99 and 35bbs deep, so ideally, we want to get as many chips from villain's weak range as possible in as few streets as possible, thereby negating our positional disadvantage and playing 2-street poker rather than giving him 5. This point seems to argue conclusively in favor of 3-betting big and doing something like a 'go-and-go' on a whole bunch of flops/turns, except the ugliest, like AKT or QJA. If villain happens to spike a J on a J85 flop, that's just variance. We certainly didn't give him implied odds pre to do so when we 3-bet big.

2) But as soon as we start wanting to slow down on more than just the very worst boards, and advocate pot-control on K85 mono-suit or Ace high boards or JTx flops or QTx flops, then 3-betting big preflop stops making as much sense to me. Flatting pre-flop feels super-weak, though it's obviously +EV and maybe the only reasonable alternative to (1) when 35BBs deep.

The other tactic is to 3-bet like 2.25x, ensuring calls from a huge range, including crushed hands like 87/65/lower pairs, dominated hands like K8/A4, and hands like QT which outflop us 33% of the time. And so now we can pick which flops to continue on with more discretion than in scenario (1), while still charging villain extra chips preflop beyond his open-raise.

But it may be that we're just too shallow here for 3-bet small to commit us any less than 3-bet big, except we charge villain less preflop? It might work better in the 45BB-38BB range, or something. Need a more poker math-oriented person than me to tell us if at 35BBs deep our basic options here are flat preflop, 3-bet big and 'go' on 90% of flops, or 3-bet shove.

I can't believe you used to charge me for this gospel, and now you're giving it away for free on the interwebs.

Good to see you put a lot of thought into the hand here. And you are right about two schools are thought that both make good points.

However, I have to disagree with your above statement. In fact, if our intention is to get it in on any Txx, Jxx, Qxx, Kxx board, then we are actually giving him good implied odds (unless we 3-bet HUGE).

I used to always reraise medium pairs based on the same logic I've seen in this thread. (e.g "we crush his range... let's get a lot of chips in when we are sure we have the best hand. Why should let him get a flop cheap?"). Then I discovered I was unable to answer the question, "what do I do when the board comes something like Jxx?" Do we lead out and fold to a raise? Call a raise? Check/Call? It's a difficult spot to be in after reraising preflop.

So rather than try to answer a difficult question, I decided it's better to avoid the difficult situation in the first place. If I can avoid the difficult decisions, I'll make less bad ones...

Haha, sorry Lenny. This forum stuff is growing on me very quickly... *almost* makes me want to bring back the HUH. As I recall, you were the biggest winner for that 1 month of its existence.

Haven't read a lot of replies but with these stacksizes I can't see how you can not be all-in by turn.
3bet to 180 preflop, 300 on flop, rest on turn imo; sucks if he has Kx but he has a naked club or an 8 or a straightdraw with a club too often not to ship turn here (if he has 5x then he's my hero and i'd snap-accept rematch but it's stars so no rematchbutton)

agree 100%

???Huh,isn't it for value???