Herp. Sorry, mistyped that.

I'm referring to NL2, where a lot of the people you play against are passive and don't understand taking a pot down with a bluff. It's easy to get to showdown, or easier at least, and when an opponent bets 8ish times out of 10 it's with two pair or TP.
Means you're not burning a bit of money here and there by c-betting with second-rate holdings where you can't barrel many cards, and where people float a lot.

I think 22 on a Q84r needs to cbet. You will have trouble getting to showndown against worse hands, who might be inclined to bluff at it. When you cbet you can take out hands like 33/55/66/77 which are ahead of you. You might also fold out all kinds of unpaired Kx and Ax hands which still have decent equity against you. Also, if you get raised you can toss it away easily, unlike for example a hand like A8s or JJ, or even something like Q9s which would hate to get raised here (you should prob still cbet those, though).

I would also cbet A6o on a T32r board, because I think it will show a higher expectation than checking. It will also be mightily difficult to get to showdown with A-high and win the pot.

Being IP or OOP also make quite a difference. I'm more inclined to check back some hands with showdown value or equity IP than OOP.

With 22 on Q84r I don't want to be called by worse when cbetting. That would imply I'm value betting, which I'm not. Neither am I bluffing, as very few better hands fold. The reason for the cbet is to collect the dead money, because if we don't take the pot now, we are very unlikely to get it later.

If I'm called by worse, the caller would probably have some reason for the call. On a super dry board like this it could very well be to float and take the pot down on a later street, as I'm also very unlikely to hit that board. In this case I'm screwed, because there is really no way I could call bets on turn or river if I don't hit my 2 outer. So basically if a worse hand calls and shows aggression on turn/river I will lose the pot. If a worse hand calls and it's checked down to showdown, I'm still losing a fair amount of the time. Any 2 (excluding 2x) has at least 27% equity, any BDFD has >30% equity, the gutshot has 40% equity, gutshot with BDFD has 45% equity. Looking at those numbers I am very happy if he folds his equity share otf and lets me take the pot.

I agree it's an awkward spot which is why I might fold pre with calling stations to my left or competent-ish regs, and only open with weak tight players at the table.
OOP I'd likely cbet to collect the dead money since our range should be strong, and give up if they continue. If you're going to c/f every flop you may as well fold pre.
IP I'd likely check back and hope for showdown but not expect to get there.

Anyway, worse hands which might call include AJ, KJ, TJ, 67. I agree it would be difficult to db them though.
Better hands which might fold include 33-77, 99-JJ, 8x, 4x.
So, worth a cbet imo.

Aw. :c





Folding here okay?
Edit: I should mention that it's 100% readless, at at ZOOM.

cbetting 22 when UTG on Q84r is a no brainer.

Suppose you check flop and villain checks back, what is your plan for the turn and river ? Pray and hope he does not bet in position ? Good luck with that. And I suppose you play 22-66 the same way so you are losing money everytime except when you hit a set in which case also you are rarely taking villain's stack so opening small pocket pairs UTG is a losing proposition for you.

Impossible to say without stats.
If one or both are nits, then yes.
If they are likely to get it in with AK/AQ/AJ/JJ-22 then no.

Read my edit.
100% readless.

Then I'm probably folding sometimes and calling sometimes depending on my mood, but I think readless folding might be better.

This is exactly why I want them to fold. This range has almost 40% equity vs my hand. As I'm not going to fire a second barrel most of the time, they get the correct odds to call, which makes folding a mistake according to the fundamental theorem of poker. I like villains who make mistakes!

The funny thing in this spot is that if we cbet 60% and shut down when called, villain is priced in to call with ATC (except 2x).

Step back and think about why you called the 3-bet to begin with. If you thought you were ahead why not 4-bet yourself especially if OOP? If you were set mining and believed you were behind you don't have the odds to call the shoves. If you were calling because QQ is pretty and you want to play it but don't know how to approach the situation then you need to spend some time working on pre flop strat away from the tables. What was the plan on the flop if you called and UTG called?

A decent thread thats slightly relevant. http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/78...exture-442027/

Look at the cbetting vid on the poker bank. http://www.thepokerbank.com/videos/
Haven't watched it in a while but from what I can remember its decent.

It depends what type of monotone flop and villain type but generally I find the same, that they are good for cbetting.

Bad boards to cbet are ones which hit your opponents range hard and not yours very well. For example the worse board for you is probably 987s. Here against a good opponent you will be in all kinds of trouble cbetting as a bluff. The vast majority of villains range has a pair and gutshot or better. When you see these highly coordinated boards just let it go when you have air.

Don't forget to balance your check folding range by X raising strong hands against aggro opponents though. People will just own you if you don't.

About 22 hand on Qxxr.
Against an aggro opponent i'm more likely to cbet. Against passive more likely to check. Obviously against someone with high fold to cbet i'd rather cbet and take it down but 22 is basically the nut worst hand for barreling. It has basically no equity when called. There are better hands in my range i'd rather cbet when i'm not compelled to do so with 22.

yeah with 22-33 if i checked the flop i'd basically be XFing the whole way.

Its all opponent dependent.

@ QQ cold 4bet get it in. UTg is a possible fish.

Calling the 3bet simply because vs. a UTG open and a large 3bet I expect it to be QQ+, AKo/AKs, and... that's about it. This is without reads of course.
If the flop came similar to what it did and I called and UTG called, I'd probably flat the flop and then hope I can take my hand to showdown (as I highly doubt anything I beat would barrel on that flop).

I'd have played this hand a lot different had I had any reads, but versus two unknowns in ZOOM (which I seem to see people flat calling opens with QQ preflop more than 4bet/jamming them in) I didn't want to really go throwing in a stack into the unknown.

I have started playing scared money with JJ - QQ lately though without reads, as I only ever seem to get called by KK - AA and occasionally AK.

+1 to denks.

You shouldn't have a 3bet cold calling range OOP(unless its AA/KK for dynamics reasons). Probably shouldn't have one IP as well as a standard.

So you give them a range which beats you and you decide to call OOP vs it

Guys, if you haven't seen it then get over to this thread.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32...forum-1368796/

It's gonna be epic and will also answer some/all of the questions we've been discussing recently.

haha yeah... now that you mention it that does sound pretty lolbad.

Hand from yesterday. Ideas on different lines to get more value?

MP I've got no sample on at all. BB is showing 27/14/2.1 over 91 hands

Thought pre is the best line at the time as it appears MP wants to get it in anyway, and I want BB to make a mistake by calling too much off pre (or backraising) so that flop has an SPR where it's be wrong to fold any hand

Line OTF?

I'd check behind. Its not like your hand is any way vulnerable and you have an SPR of 1ish. If I was going to bet flop i'd make it even smaller and check back most turns.

Yeah, obviously they both folded which is why I'm posting it.

Problem is, they're both highly likely to have PPs so even by checking I'm hoping they bink a 2 outer OTT so I can stack them, which I suppose should occur about 16% of the time, although this is hardly an 'in the long run' spot.
Considering I'd have to bluff this flop if I was ever in this pot without a PP, then wondered if betting is the best way to go anyway? (altho ITLR comment applies to this line of thought too i suppose)

Check, anything else is pretty mental. I mean TJs is really the only hand that someone may have convinced themselves that seeing the flop is a good idea with that even comes close to being a scary hand for them to have and even that's a bit unrealistic.

That $2 bet just looks silly.

Checking makes people think that their QQ/JJ might be good and we love people hitting lower sets or TP type hands as you're basically always betting your TP hands here.

edit - At your above post, well you need to tell us what type of range you are seeing this flop with. I'm assuming your range here is very tight. Like JJ+ AQ+. In which case bet AQ+, check JJ+. Not perfectly balanced by any means but we are pretty happy playing quite straight up here and the AA protects our checking range quite well and we don't get much value from it betting as we crush the board so much. Whereas hands like KK & QQ have plenty of showdown value, JJ too but less likely when we don't have so many blockers.

^yeh agreed.

The cbet was meant to look silly, hoping someone thought it was just random clicking but, yeh gotta check it back

I've done some more research into my turn c-betting. Turns out I mostly bet rather small. About 40% of the time my cbet is half pot or less. About 50% of the time it's 50-75% and only 7% of the time has it been >75%. Cbet success is directly correlated to bet size. When betting >75% pot the success rate is 42%, when betting < half pot, success rate is only 27%.

My sizing seems quite unbalanced and overall rather weak to me. Am I making my turn cbets too small in general?

@Dunna100

Make it 4.5 pre and watch them go crazy. Take 158bb from mp and cross fingers BB comes along. As played, sizing is fine, don't check flop - if they have anything to improve to they will call anyway, pairs might "peel one" etc.

Yeah definitely. I don't see any reason why you should be betting less than half pot size bet that often, and why your only betting >75% PSB 7% is baffling haha. I'd imagine i'd do it >25% of the time.

I was under the impression though that we were talking about flop cbet success?

edit: my turn cbet success is 37.6%. Flop and turn cbet is 63/55