20/40 late night game 6 handed at Fortune Poker

I'm new to the game and haven't been playing this game lately.

UTG lowjack straddles, HJ cold calls, CO 3-bets. I put him on a reasonable but wide range 77+, 89s, ATs+, I cap JJ on the button. BB calls. All call.

Flop 893 with a flush draw and everyone checks to me. Just like Mason has been talking about everyone checks to me and when I bet everyone is getting super good odds. Maybe I should cold call and face the field with two bets on the flop after CO bets?

Your hand is way too strong not to 4 bet pre. You can't protect your hand, but you can continue to throw in chips and get value. I say get your value while you can and preserve the potential to check back the flop if it comes bad.

My two cents: If you knew CO would bet here then you can think about calling 3-bets to narrow the field on the flop with a check-raise. But, if you did not know that, a free card would be so utterly devastating that it cannot be risked. I would not count on the CO continuation betting here with random spaz in a multiway pot, so I 4-bet, because in theory my best response should be minimizing the profit of their best response(s), and it getting checked around in spots like this is just pure p'wnage on your win rate. To me, this looks double-edged at best, and you're frequently going to be on the wrong edge costing yourself the whole pot instead of securing yourself the whole pot.

CO acts before me but I agree it's not a certainty that he will bet the flop.

Oh yes, my bad. I had a long post, but didn't finish.

People who peel getting 21 to 1 also peel getting 16 to 1. Plus maybe UTG folds for 2 more but not one more

If CO bets the flop and I raise the other players will be getting 18 to 2. It's not a huge stretch to think they might fold incorrectly getting 9 to 1 but call correctly getting 20 to 1.

Checking back here would be god awful.

I think "protecting your hand" is one of the more overrated concepts in limit holdem. If I was teaching someone to play from scratch, I'd have them spend a ton of time studying equities and just tell them to push their edge when they have it. So much of the time we "protect our hand," our opponents either have better hands, would have folded anyway, or are sharing outs with each other (making our hand less vulnerable than we might think).

There is something worth thinking about in the "protecting your hand" reasoning.

If it works, essentially teaming up from the button w/ the CO, then it is a great coup. And the CO, knowing that getting folds would benefit his equity as well, even w/ only overs (i.e. AK), could bet and also get more equity for their hand, as the pot is sufficiently large. So, this could be one of those "coalitions". So, this is a decent example of the same point Mason Malmuth posted about.

Somehow though, over the felt, situations like this just do not go as planned. AK doesn't know you have JJ, and JJ doesn't know you have AK. Nobody knows what the hell everyone else is going to do. And, as soon as the coalition is profitable, it is undermined anyway. Though this problem is currently unsolvable (and it isn't even close), so I can't outright dismiss such logic.

I think it's somewhat unclear whether you should try this play or not.

I say his hand is way too weak not to 3 bet pre. Why let the sb or BB come in with Q- or K-x and hit a card that beats you? I'd be more inclined to consider merely cold-calling pre with A-A than J-J.

Hi brick:

Here's my anlysis of this hand.

Preflop, you should, as you did, definitely make it four bets. You want to keep the blinds out as well as make the straddle fold (even though in my experience players who straddle usually intend to play).

For more explanation of this you may want to look at "Rules for Preflop Limit Hold ’em" starting on page 32 in The Intelligent Poker Player by Philip Newall.

On the flop, given that the pot is already very large, I think you should strongly consider checking after everyone has checked to you. Then on the turn, go ahead and raise no matter what card hits. This way, in case your hand is still best on the turn, you may stop someone from drawing out on you on the river. Notice that if you bet the flop and the turn, they probably will still be around to draw out on the river.

For more explanation of these type of plays, see "Part Four: Playing in Loose Games" starting on page 151 of our book Hold 'em Poker for Advanced Players.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi mongidig:

As you can see in my above post, you can, at least to some degree, protect your hand, but it does require an unusual strategy. And the question becomes whether the pot has become large enough (and this is mainly based on judgement and experience) to make employing this strategy best.

Best iwshes,
Mason

Hi brick:

Well, on the flop there's 20 small bets. But if no one bets the flop, it then becomes 10 large bets. Then on the turn if there's a bet and you raise, anyone else is now getting 13-to-2 or 6.5-to-1.

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi Frankie:

While much of what you're saying may be true most of the time, this situation is a a lot different because the pot has become very large.

Best wishes,
Mason

Nice pot manipulation tactics. I see how it possible to use different lines to manipulate the odds we are giving our opponents.

I often felt I was getting into too many hands where I had the betting lead the whole way. Now that I have been playing NL for the last year I have learned to just call preflop in certain situations or check behind more on the flop. This has helped improve my limit Hold'em game. Thanks!

It never would have occurred to me to check here. It certainly isn't the style I am accustomed to. I can't think of a single player who would check here. Yet, getting players in for two on the turn, forcing opponents out, seems reasonable. Thanks for the post MM. I will purchase my second copies of these books.

There are so many things that would have to go perfectly for a flop check to be correct, that it pretty much isn't. A number of things can go wrong:

A) Nobody bets the turn.
B) The turn bet comes from an early position bettor, everyone calls (correctly) with their one pair, gutshot, etc. before the action gets to you. You now aren't even able to do what you were hoping (face players with 2 bets).
C) An overcard comes and you put in 2 big bets with 5% equity.
D) Players pick up additional equity on the turn (runner-runner flush, gutshots, pairs) where people are now making correct calls on the turn where they were making incorrect calls on the flop.
E) Small pocket pairs get 5% free equity on the flop where they would fold to a bet.
F) An Ace comes on the turn and someone bets and now you raise? Really?
G) An Ace comes on the turn and everyone checks to you and you bet. Really?
H) The turn card is scary (with a 98x two-flush board, we're talking lots of turn 2-pair, straight making cards, 3rd flush, or board pairing) and it goes bet-raise in front of us. What do we do? Call? 3-bet? Fold?

Any one of these scenarios would be a massive mistake from a FTOP POV, not even counting the bets missing from checking back the flop.

Huh? Did anyone suggest this?

yes. did you read the thread?

Yeah, I have read the whole thread now. Mason did suggest that, but 6 hours later! PaulValente = psychic?!?

We've known for some time now that Mr. Valente can see The Future.

Ha. PV probably knew where the convo was going.

C, and F are concerns. If checked, and an ace falls, I'd fold, barring unusual opponents and reads. People don't try to bluff multiple opponents.

B would still mean more equity though, even if not fold equity.

A seems unlikely, perhaps <10%.

D, and E are possible, but only the small pairs seem to fit this, and many blindly peel this anyway.

If it's 2! to you on the turn, you have a decision point.

I think calling with jj at some frequency pre-flop is fine (and should change with a 4b vs 5b cap) but betting the flop has to be standard given the line and game description, even though the concept of making a larger effective raise on the turn has value its not clear that this particular hand especially benefits from it or that opponents would appreciate it

Edit: we are still talking about a pot with a straddle and straddle over-limp, I can't see how betting the flop isn't vastly superior to a check

Moreover, I think that if we did check the flop and study all the various permutations, perfect strategy would dictate hero raise turn at a relatively small (certainly less than 1/3), so that being the rationale for checking the flop is more than a littl concerning